Home › Comparison tool › Phi-4 14B vs. Qwen 3.6 27B

Phi-4 14BvsQwen 3.6 27B

Complete comparison between Phi-4 14B (14B parameters, Microsoft) and Qwen 3.6 27B (27B, Alibaba). VRAM required by quantization, tokens/second measured on 4 reference GPUs, use-case verdict, license, installation commands. All figures are calculated from catalog data—no copy-pasting between pages.

In brief

Feature Phi-4 14B Qwen 3.6 27B
Settings 14B 27B
Family Phi Qwen
Author Microsoft Alibaba
Origin US CN
License MIT Apache 2.0
Context 16,384 tokens 262,144 tokens
Output December 2024 April 2026

Memory footprint

Approximate VRAM required for inference with an average context window. The winner (in green) is the model that uses less — smaller models have the edge.

Quantization Phi-4 14B Qwen 3.6 27B
Q4_K_M (lightweight) 9 GB 16 GB
Q5_K_M (balanced) 11 GB 19 GB
Q8 (near-lossless) 16 GB 29 GB
FP16 (max quality) 28 GB 54 GB
CPU-only RAM 16 GB 28 GB

Estimated speed (tokens/second)

Estimates based on the best quantization that can fit on each GPU. Actual figures depend on the prompt, context, and engine (llama.cpp, vLLM, MLX). Methodology.

Reference GPU Phi-4 14B Qwen 3.6 27B
RTX 4090 (24 GB) 55 tok/s · Q8 32 tok/s · Q5_K_M
RTX 4080 (16 GB) 20 tok/s · Q8 13 tok/s · Q4_K_M
RTX 3060 12GB (12 GB) 6 tok/s · Q5_K_M ✗ too heavy
Apple M4 Pro (48 GB) (36 GB) 20 tok/s · FP16 13 tok/s · Q8

Verdict by use case

For each common use case, we indicate which of the two is better suited based on its tags, size, and specialization.

General chat
Qwen 3.6 27B wins. Best capacity-to-constraints ratio for this use case.
Development / code
Qwen 3.6 27B wins. Code-specialized model, best on HumanEval and MBPP.
Reasoning / math
Qwen 3.6 27B wins. Explicit-reasoning model (chain-of-thought), better for math and logic problems.
Vision / image
Qwen 3.6 27B wins. Natively supports image inputs.
RAG / long documents
Qwen 3.6 27B wins. Larger context window (262 144 tokens), suitable for long documents.
Agents & tool use
Qwen 3.6 27B wins. Best at tool use and following multi-step instructions.
The Local AI Kit

Your private, free ChatGPT on your machine in 1 hour — LM Studio, Ollama, Open WebUI, your documents, no cloud.

  • Lifetime online access
  • PDF + files
  • 30-day money-back guarantee

Strengths and weaknesses

Microsoft · 14B

Phi-4 14B

Exceptional reasoning for its size. STEM-focused.

  • Best 14B for reasoning in late 2024
  • MIT License
  • Very strong in math/science
  • Good at coding
  • 16k context only — major limitation
  • Less multilingual than Qwen

Installation

ollama run phi4:14b
Alibaba · 27B

Qwen 3.6 27B

Dense multimodal 27B released April 22, 2026. 262k ctx (1M YaRN). SWE-bench Verified 77.2%.

  • SWE-bench Verified 77.2%
  • Native multimodal
  • 262k context (1M YaRN)
  • Apache 2.0
  • 16+ GB in Q4
  • Hybrid architecture (recent llama.cpp support required)

Installation

ollama run qwen3.6:27b

Frequently asked questions

Which model runs best on RTX 4090 (24 GB): Phi-4 14B or Qwen 3.6 27B?

On a RTX 4090, Phi-4 14B runs at Q8 (~55 tok/s), Qwen 3.6 27B in Q5_K_M (~32 tok/s). In pure throughput terms, Phi-4 14B wins. See the configurator to test your exact GPU.

Which uses the least VRAM?

In Q4_K_M, Phi-4 14B fits in 9 GB versus 16 GB for its rival—a 7 GB gap, significant if you're targeting an RTX 3060 or an 8 GB 4060 Ti.

Phi-4 14B or Qwen 3.6 27B for coding?

Qwen 3.6 27B is the best fit (code-specialized, top HumanEval scores). For an IDE copilot, pair it with Continue or Aider.

Can these models be used in commercial production?

Phi-4 14B is under the MIT license — free for commercial use. Qwen 3.6 27B is under Apache 2.0 — also free to use. For SaaS, prefer Apache 2.0 or MIT.

Which one should you choose in 2026?

Depends on your primary constraint. Smaller / faster: Phi-4 14B (14B). More capable: Qwen 3.6 27B (27B). If you're unsure, run the configurator with your GPU and use case — it will decide based on both.

Alternatives to consider

If neither works for you, here are some neighboring models you could explore.

Go further