Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs 9.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 27 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4 Pro

DeepSeek

54.3

Rank #31 Confirmed

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

Google

43.5

Rank #92 Confirmed

Summary

They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Pro leads 56.5 to 21.8.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 47% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 6% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT.
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper at $0.0675 / $0.23 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1.98 for DeepSeek V4 Pro.
DeepSeek V4 Pro accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT specifications
	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
Provider	DeepSeek	Google
Noometry Index	54.3	43.5
Released	2026-04-24	2026-04-02
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	1M	262K
Max output	393K	33K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.66	$0.0675
Output $ / M tokens	$1.98	$0.23
Results tracked	48	28

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 52.4 (#34), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 39.0 (#164)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena WebDev	1582	1359
SciCode	51%	40%
WeirdML	66.2%	35.2%
LMArena Coding	1470	1447
ALE-Bench	1,403	927.17
SWE-bench Verified	77.6%	—
FrontierCode	28.6%	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 32.8 (#58), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
APEX-Agents	47.3%	—
Vending-Bench 2	3,285	—

Reasoning DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 56.5 (#24), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
CritPt	18%	0%
Chess Puzzles	47%	6%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1461	1439
DTBench	93.9%	74.9%
LMCA	45.5%	29.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index	155.31	141.85
ARC-AGI-2	61.3%	—
Kagi LLM Benchmark	53.5%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	91.3%	—
ARC-AGI-1	90.5%	—
Mystery Game Puzzles	43%	—
Surface Evolver Bench	40%	—
ForecastBench	56.1	—

Math DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 64.8 (#30), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	98.6%	82.2%
LMArena Math	1455	1470
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	64.6%	—
FrontierMath Tier 4	26.8%	—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions	76.6%	—
ProofBench	50%	—

Knowledge DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 59.5 (#31), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
GPQA Diamond	91.7%	73.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	8.6%	5.2%
LMArena Expert	1464	1447
SimpleQA Verified	52.9%	—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek V4 Pro: —, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Vision	—	1260

Multilingual DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 54.4 (#45), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Non-English	1439	1421
LMArena Chinese	1486	1495
LMArena French	1472	1460
LMArena Russian	1453	1434
LMArena Spanish	1458	1417
LMArena German	1458	—
LMArena Japanese	1445	—
LMArena Korean	1447	—

Instruction Following DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 76.1 (#47), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Instruction Following	1448	1420

Long Context DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 45.0 (#51), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Longer Query	1458	1428
CL-bench Life	13.5%	—

Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4 Pro: 65.5 (#46), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Pro	Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Text	1451	1434
LMArena Creative Writing	1446	1402
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1553	1305
LMArena Multi-Turn	1467	1441
EQ-Bench 4	1166	—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemma 4 26B A4B IT?

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemma 4 26B A4B IT?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.0675 per million input tokens and $0.23 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V4 Pro lists at $0.66 and $1.98.

Is DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better for coding?

DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.4 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4 Pro does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Pro has 48 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28.