Phi-4-mini vs Qwen-MT Plus vs Step 1 (32K)
Phi-4-mini comes out ahead, 58 to 18 and 12 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
MicrosoftPhi-4-mini
58/100- ECI—
- Price$0.075 / $0.30
- Context128K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-MT Plus
12/100- ECI—
- Price$2.46 / $7.37
- Context16K
StepFunStep 1 (32K)
18/100- ECI—
- Price$2.05 / $9.59
- Context33K
Phi-4-mini is our pick
Phi-4-mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Step 1 (32K) (18) and Qwen-MT Plus (12). It leads on price 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 pricePhi-4-miniPhi-4-mini $0.131 · Qwen-MT Plus $3.69 · Step 1 (32K) $3.94 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextPhi-4-miniPhi-4-mini 128,000 · Step 1 (32K) 32,768 · Qwen-MT Plus 16,384 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsPhi-4-mini: Text · Qwen-MT Plus: Text · Step 1 (32K): Text
- Self-hostingPhi-4-miniPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Phi-4-mini | Qwen-MT Plus | Step 1 (32K) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 92 | 23 | 22 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 0 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 0 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 58/100 | 12/100 | 18/100 |
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 | Qwen-MT PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | Step 1 (32K)StepFun |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.075 (best) | $2.46 | $2.05 |
| Output | $0.30 (best) | $7.37 | $9.59 |
| Cached input | — | — | $0.41 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.131 (best) | $3.69 | $3.94 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Azure API | Official Alibaba API | Official StepFun (Global) API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens (best) | 16,384 tokens | 32,768 tokens |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | phi-4-mini | qwen-mt-plus | step-1-32k |
| API providers | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Released | Dec 11, 2024 | Jan 2025 | Jan 1, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Oct 2023 | Apr 2024 | Jun 2024 |
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
- Qwen-MT Plus$39.34
- Step 1 (32K)$39.68
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Phi-4-mini, Qwen-MT Plus or Step 1 (32K)?
Phi-4-mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Step 1 (32K) (18) and Qwen-MT Plus (12). It leads on price 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, Qwen-MT Plus or Step 1 (32K)?
Phi-4-mini is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Azure API price). Qwen-MT Plus costs $2.46 input / $7.37 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Step 1 (32K) costs $2.05 input / $9.59 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) 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 $3.69 for Qwen-MT Plus (28× as much) and $3.94 for Step 1 (32K) (30× 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, Qwen-MT Plus has not been scored yet and Step 1 (32K) has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Phi-4-mini, Qwen-MT Plus and Step 1 (32K) yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-MT Plus does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Phi-4-mini has the largest context window at 128,000 tokens, against 32,768 for Step 1 (32K) and 16,384 for Qwen-MT Plus. Maximum output per response: Phi-4-mini up to 4,096, Qwen-MT Plus up to 8,192, Step 1 (32K) up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Phi-4-mini accepts text; Qwen-MT Plus accepts text; Step 1 (32K) accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Phi-4-mini publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen-MT Plus and Step 1 (32K) is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen-MT Plus is the newest, released Jan 2025. Step 1 (32K) came out Jan 1, 2025; Phi-4-mini came out Dec 11, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Phi-4-mini Oct 2023, Qwen-MT Plus Apr 2024, Step 1 (32K) Jun 2024.
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.
