Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3 235B-A22B
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and Qwen3 235B-A22B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.5 vs 43.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads 21.8 to 15.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 73.2% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and 80.1% for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper at $0.0675 / $0.23 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 43.5 | 43.5 |
| Released | 2026-04-02 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | 131K |
| Max output | 33K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.0675 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.23 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 28 | 49 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 39.0 (#164), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 40% | 42.4% |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | 41% |
| LMArena Coding | 1447 | 1445 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 59.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1359 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 927.17 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 52.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | -11.34 |
Reasoning Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1439 | 1433 |
| DTBench | 74.9% | 80.3% |
| LMCA | 29.7% | 29.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.85 | 143.85 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 1.3% |
| SimpleBench | — | 31% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 69.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 11% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.7 |
Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 82.2% | 86.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1470 | 1432 |
| Omni-MATH | — | 71.8% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 68.9% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 8.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 73.2% | 80.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.2% | 9.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1447 | 1463 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 40.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 84.4% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 72.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46), Qwen3 235B-A22B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1260 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1421 | 1409 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1481 |
| LMArena French | 1460 | 1445 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1411 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1417 | 1430 |
| LMArena German | — | 1433 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1391 |
Instruction Following Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1408 |
| IFEval | — | 83.5% |
Long Context Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1426 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 75% |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1434 | 1419 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1402 | 1384 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1305 | 1366 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1432 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83% |
| WildBench | — | 86.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and Qwen3 235B-A22B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.5 vs 43.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Qwen3 235B-A22B?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.0675 per million input tokens and $0.23 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B-A22B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?
Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT does, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.