Phi-4-mini vs Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Reka Flash 3
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 82 to 56 and 50 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
MicrosoftPhi-4-mini
56/100- ECI—
- Price$0.075 / $0.30
- Context128K
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
82/100- ECI—
- Price$0.064 / $0.255
- Context1.05M
Reka AIReka Flash 3
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.20
- Context66K
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is our pick
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 82/100 against Phi-4-mini (56) and Reka Flash 3 (50). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. 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 priceGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite $0.111 · Reka Flash 3 $0.125 · Phi-4-mini $0.131 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Phi-4-mini 128,000 · Reka Flash 3 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.0 Flash-LitePhi-4-mini: Text · Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Reka Flash 3: Text
- Self-hostingPhi-4-mini and Reka Flash 3Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Phi-4-mini | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Reka Flash 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 88 | 91 | 89 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 80 | 10 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 61 | 12 |
| Overall | 100% | 56/100 | 82/100 | 50/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Phi-4-miniMicrosoft | Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGoogle | Reka Flash 3Reka AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.075 | $0.064 (best) | $0.10 |
| Output | $0.30 | $0.255 | $0.20 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.131 | $0.111 (best) | $0.125 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Azure API | Median of 2 providers | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 58,982 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | phi-4-mini | — | — |
| API providers | 2 | 3 (best) | 3 (best) |
| Released | Feb 26, 2025 | Dec 11, 2024 | Mar 10, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 2024 | Jun 2024 | Jan 31, 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Phi-4-mini$1.35
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite$1.15
- Reka Flash 3$1.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Phi-4-mini, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Reka Flash 3?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 82/100 against Phi-4-mini (56) and Reka Flash 3 (50). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Phi-4-mini, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Reka Flash 3?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.064 input / $0.255 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Reka Flash 3 costs $0.10 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers); Phi-4-mini costs $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 $0.111 per million tokens for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite versus $0.125 for Reka Flash 3 (1.1× as much) and $0.131 for Phi-4-mini (1.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Phi-4-mini has not been scored yet, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has not been scored yet and Reka Flash 3 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Phi-4-mini, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Reka Flash 3 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Reka Flash 3 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 128,000 for Phi-4-mini and 65,536 for Reka Flash 3. Maximum output per response: Phi-4-mini up to 4,096, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite up to 8,192, Reka Flash 3 up to 58,982 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Phi-4-mini accepts text; Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Reka Flash 3 accepts text. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Phi-4-mini and Reka Flash 3 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Reka Flash 3 is the newest, released Mar 10, 2025. Phi-4-mini came out Feb 26, 2025; Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite came out Dec 11, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Phi-4-mini Jun 2024, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Jun 2024, Reka Flash 3 Jan 31, 2025.
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 Nov 2, 2026.
