Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B

Claude Opus 5.5 leads Gemma 4 26B A4B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 57.6 to 16.7, and Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 33.3x less per output token ($0.60 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 44 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic
Coding
88.8
Overall
87.1
Output $/M
$20.00
44
Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
0
vs boards won of 44 shared

Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemma 4 26B A4B: which to pick

Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a coding score, 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 4 26B A4B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 4 26B A4B for output tokens 33.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $20.00 per million).

Shared results
44
Claude Opus 5.5 only
65
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
11
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 5.5 88.8 from 5 benchmarks, Gemma 4 26B A4B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 37.3 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: Claude Opus 5.5 1807 against Gemma 4 26B A4B 1360, 64.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 5.5 $20.00 against Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 per million output tokens, 33.3x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 5.5 takes 1M tokens, Gemma 4 26B A4B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 5.5BarsGemma 4 26B A4BTies
Coding70
Intelligence20
Reasoning70
Math30
Knowledge50
General200
All shared boards440
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index70
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
LiveBench coding96.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev18071360Claude Opus 5.5
AA Coding IndexNot measured39.3Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)65.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)90.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)66.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)18.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)95.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)87.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)74.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SciCode66.9%40.0%Claude Opus 5.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured25.0%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
FrontierCode54.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierSWE62.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
WeirdMLNot measured35.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
MirrorCode77.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ALE-Bench2147.4927.2Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: coding15451446Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: software and IT15381454Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: React18551351Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML17531362Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: from an image1753Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SciCode18.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Intelligence Index57.616.7Claude Opus 5.5
Epoch Capabilities Index168.8141.9Claude Opus 5.5
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index25 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured2.9Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1316Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1308Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1368Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench research85.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench browser80.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench long agentic85.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)33.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)58.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)45.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)50.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)9.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)75.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)47.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vals Science Index58.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)91.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)14.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)14.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured43.6%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
APEX-Agents73.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Remote Labor Index21.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SpireClimb3.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,235Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Search1213Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
LiveBench reasoning92.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured79.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)61.4%19.3%Claude Opus 5.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.6%73.2%Claude Opus 5.5
ARC-AGI98.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ARC-AGI-293.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Chess puzzles67.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles71.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
EBR-bench71.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts15361438Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: expert15491447Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15351448Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: diagrams13451264Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: homework13621293Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%82.2%Claude Opus 5.5
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 391.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 495.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProofBench100.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: math15181470Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work15161475Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
MedCode (Vals AI)49.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SimpleQA Verified72.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: science15241446Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare15091428Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: legal and government15181457Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14941429Claude Opus 5.5
FACTS Benchmark Suite65.3%42.7%Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
Design Arena: websites1335Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1385Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1461Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1397Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1476Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1329Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench design86.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index200
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
Vals Index70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench data analysis80.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)70.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)45.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)91.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IFBenchNot measured72.4%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.7%65.7%Claude Opus 5.5
DTBench98.9%74.9%Claude Opus 5.5
LMCA68.2%29.7%Claude Opus 5.5
Furniture assembly83.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text15161434Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: instruction following15371420Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: creative writing15351400Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision13211260Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: English15191444Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: non-English15071421Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Chinese15821495Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Japanese1534Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: French14931460Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Spanish15081415Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Russian15171434Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn15011441Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: longer queries15321427Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: writing and language15321405Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media15151403Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: English13171256Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1312Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text13261268Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1272Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1297Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1191Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing13201256Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$0.014Fits in one request
Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.0004Fits in one request

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$0.260Fits in one request
Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.0093Fits in one request

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$1.00Fits in one request
Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.036Fits in one request

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 5.5Google Gemma 4 26B A4B
MakerAnthropicGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026April 3, 2026
Context window1M262K
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.15
Output $/Mtok$20.00$0.60
Coding index88.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it51
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Gemma 4 26B A4B for coding?

Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a coding score, 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 4 26B A4B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 4 26B A4B for output tokens 33.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 per million output tokens; Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Claude Opus 5.5, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B comparison based on?

44 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 5.5's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and Gemma 4 26B A4B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next