| Signal | GPT-5 Chat | Delta | Phi 4 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | +33 | |
Benchmarks | 70 | -3 | |
Pricing | 90 | -10 | |
Context window size | 81 | +14 | |
Recency | 89 | +38 | |
Output Capacity | 70 | -- | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
70.5
current score
Tied
right now
70.5
current score
OpenAI
Microsoft
Phi 4 saves you $611.50/month
That's $7338.00/year compared to GPT-5 Chat at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-5 Chat | Phi 4 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 71 | 71 | -- |
| Rank | #55 | #56 | GPT-5 Chat |
| Quality Rank | #55 | #56 | GPT-5 Chat |
| Adoption Rank | #55 | #56 | GPT-5 Chat |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 128K | 16K | GPT-5 Chat |
| Pricing | $1.25/$10.00/M | $0.07/$0.14/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 33 | GPT-5 Chat |
| Benchmarks | 70 | 73 | Phi 4 |
| Pricing | 90 | 100 | Phi 4 |
| Context window size | 81 | 67 | GPT-5 Chat |
| Recency | 89 | 51 | GPT-5 Chat |
| Output Capacity | 70 | 70 | GPT-5 Chat |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 71/100 (rank #55), placing it in the top 81% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 71/100 (rank #56), placing it in the top 81% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Phi 4 offers 98% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $3.08/month with Phi 4 vs $168.75/month with GPT-5 Chat - a $165.68 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Phi 4 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (128K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.14/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (71/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
GPT-5 Chat and Phi 4 are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
GPT-5 Chat
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Phi 4
98% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-5 Chat
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-5 Chat
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-5 Chat
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
| Capability | GPT-5 Chat | Phi 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
Microsoft
Phi 4 saves you $13.96/month
That's 98% cheaper than GPT-5 Chat at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | GPT-5 Chat | Phi 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 128K | 16K |
| Max Output Tokens | 16,384 | 16,384 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Aug 7, 2025 | Jan 10, 2025 |
Both GPT-5 Chat and Phi 4 score 71/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
GPT-5 Chat is ranked #55 and Phi 4 is ranked #56 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Phi 4 is cheaper at $0.14/M output tokens vs GPT-5 Chat's $10.00/M output tokens - 71.4x more expensive. Input token pricing: GPT-5 Chat at $1.25/M vs Phi 4 at $0.07/M.
GPT-5 Chat has a larger context window of 128,000 tokens compared to Phi 4's 16,384 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.