Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Phi-4-mini vs Vision Large
Vision Large comes out ahead, 84 to 78 and 25 on our weighted score.
GoogleGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
78/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1.05M
MicrosoftPhi-4-mini
25/100- ECI—
- Price$0.075 / $0.30
- Context128K
- Our pick
VisparkVision Large
84/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1M
Vision Large is our pick
Vision Large is the better all-round choice, scoring 84/100 against Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite (78) and Phi-4-mini (25). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest pricePhi-4-miniPhi-4-mini $0.131 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Vision Large unpriced
- Longest contextGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Vision Large 1,000,000 · Phi-4-mini 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Vision LargeGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Phi-4-mini: Text · Vision Large: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingPhi-4-miniPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Phi-4-mini | Vision Large |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 90 | 25 | 100 |
| Context window | 40% | 61 | 24 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 78/100 | 25/100 | 84/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGoogle | Phi-4-miniMicrosoft | Vision LargeVispark |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | — | $0.075 | — |
| Output | — | $0.30 | — |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.131 | — |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate | — |
| Price source | — | Official Azure API | — |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 4,096 tokens | 65,536 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No | Yes |
| Audio | Yes | No | Yes |
| Video | Yes | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | phi-4-mini | — |
| API providers | — | 1 | — |
| Released | Dec 11, 2024 | Dec 11, 2024 | May 15, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 2024 | Oct 2023 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite—
- Phi-4-mini$1.35
- Vision Large—
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite, Phi-4-mini or Vision Large?
Vision Large is the better all-round choice, scoring 84/100 against Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite (78) and Phi-4-mini (25). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite, Phi-4-mini or Vision Large?
Phi-4-mini is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Azure API price). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.131 per million tokens for Phi-4-mini versus . Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Vision Large has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has not been scored yet, Phi-4-mini has not been scored yet and Vision Large has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite, Phi-4-mini and Vision Large yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Vision Large and 128,000 for Phi-4-mini. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite up to 8,192, Phi-4-mini up to 4,096, Vision Large up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Phi-4-mini accepts text; Vision Large accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Phi-4-mini publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Vision Large is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the newest, released Dec 11, 2024. Phi-4-mini came out Dec 11, 2024; Vision Large came out May 15, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Jun 2024, Phi-4-mini Oct 2023.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
