Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking vs Microsoft Phi-4
Detailed comparison for LLMs
Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking and Microsoft Phi-4 are evenly matched at about 30.0% attack success rate (ASR) on Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark. One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
It's a close match between Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking and Phi-4!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking vs Microsoft Phi-4. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
No specific highlights generated for this comparison.
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking or Microsoft Phi-4 more secure?
Alibaba Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking and Microsoft Phi-4 are evenly matched at about 30.0% attack success rate (ASR) on Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark. One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking vs Phi-4?
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking has a 30.0% ASR and Phi-4 has a 30.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking and Phi-4 tested?
Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.