Microsoft Phi-4 vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite

Detailed comparison for LLMs

MicrosoftGoogle

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Microsoft Phi-4 is the more secure of the two: Phi-4 scores 30.0% and Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite scores 31.3% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

Head-to-Head Overview

Phi-4 is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Microsoft Phi-4 vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.

Overall (ASR)

Phi-4
30.0%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite
31.3%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Phi-4
Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite
63.9%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Phi-4
Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite
28.7%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Phi-4
Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite
1.3%

Key Highlights

  • Microsoft Phi-4 has a lower Overall (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Phi-4
Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite
Full security profile
Microsoft Phi-4
Full security profile
Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite

Frequently asked questions

Is Microsoft Phi-4 or Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Microsoft Phi-4 is the more secure of the two: Phi-4 scores 30.0% and Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite scores 31.3% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Phi-4 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite?

Phi-4 has a 30.0% ASR and Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite has a 31.3% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Phi-4 and Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite 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.

Related Comparisons