ModelRefs / Phi-4 vs Gemma 3 27B — Benchmarks, Pricing & Coding Compari…
Phi-4 vs Gemma 3 27B — Benchmarks, Pricing & Coding Compari…
Phi-4 vs Gemma 3 27B: side-by-side benchmarks, pricing, context windows, coding ability and deployment. Pick the right model for your stack.
Overview
Phi-4: Microsoft's 14B dense decoder-only open-weight text model, trained on 9.8T tokens with a synthetic-data-centered curriculum and available through the microsoft/phi-4 artifact and Microsoft Foundry.
Context window: Gemma 3 27B accepts up to 128,000 tokens, Phi-4 up to 16,384. Confirm the limit for your specific deployment channel before relying on it.
Gemma 3 27B vs Phi-4 at a glance
| Attribute | Gemma 3 27B | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | |
| Released | 2025-02-01 | 2024-12-12 |
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 16,384 tokens |
| Input price | $0.1/M tokens | Free / self-hosted |
| Output price | $0.3/M tokens | Free / self-hosted |
| Licence | Gemma | MIT |
| Self-hostable | Yes, open weights | Yes, open weights |
| Modalities | text, vision | text |
Where they differ most
- Reasoning: Gemma 3 27B 82%, Phi-4 65%. Gemma 3 27B leads on this dimension.
- Cost Efficiency: Gemma 3 27B 95%, Phi-4 100%. Phi-4 leads on this dimension.
Capability scores are ModelRefs' own derived signals, not vendor claims or benchmark results. Validate against your own workload before relying on them.
Continue your research
Use these connected ModelRefs sections to compare alternatives, inspect implementation paths, and review the evidence and governance boundaries relevant to Phi-4 vs Gemma 3 27B — Benchmarks, Pricing & Coding Compari….
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Phi-4 or Gemma 3 27B?
Phi-4 and Gemma 3 27B target different workloads — see the benchmark and pricing tables for a side-by-side answer.
Is Phi-4 cheaper than Gemma 3 27B?
Compare $0.00000 vs $0.00010 on this page.