Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command R (08-2024) vs Gemma 4 26B A4B

Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B cost about the same per output token ($0.60 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 22 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Command R (08-2024) Replace Gemma 4 26B A4B
Command R (08-2024)Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
22
vs boards won of 22 shared

Command R (08-2024) or Gemma 4 26B A4B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Command R (08-2024) for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Model ACommand R (08-2024)CohereNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGemma 4 26B A4BGoogleNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
22
Command R (08-2024) only
3
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
33
Like-for-like categories
5 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
Command R (08-2024) not benchmarked, Gemma 4 26B A4B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 46.6 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: math: Command R (08-2024) 1188 against Gemma 4 26B A4B 1470, 47.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Both cost $0.60 per million output tokens.
Context window
Command R (08-2024) takes 128K 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
CategoryCommand R (08-2024)BarsGemma 4 26B A4BTies
Coding02
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General011
All shared boards022
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1360Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured39.3Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
SciCodeNot measured40.0%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured25.0%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
WeirdMLNot measured35.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
ALE-BenchNot measured927.2Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: coding11871446Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: software and IT11971454Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1351Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1362Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured16.7Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured141.9Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured2.9Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured43.6%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured79.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured19.3%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured73.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11861438Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: expert11731447Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English11941448Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1264Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1293Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured82.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: math11881470Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: mathematical work11981475Gemma 4 26B A4B
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
LMArena Text: science12521446Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12381428Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: legal and government12681457Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: business and finance12151429Gemma 4 26B A4B
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured42.7%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index011
General benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
IFBenchNot measured72.4%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured65.7%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
DTBenchNot measured74.9%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMCANot measured29.7%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text12291434Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: instruction following11971420Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: creative writing12341400Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena VisionNot measured1260Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: English12381444Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: non-English12161421Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Chinese12271495Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: German1216Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1166Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1162Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1460Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1415Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: Russian12271434Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: multi-turn12131441Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: longer queries12301427Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: writing and language12411405Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12231403Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1256Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1312Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1268Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
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 writingNot measured1256Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Gemma 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

Command R (08-2024)$0.0004Fits in one request
Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.0004Fits in one request

Same cost

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command R (08-2024)$0.0093Fits in one request
Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.0093Fits in one request

Same cost

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command R (08-2024)$0.036Exceeds the context window
Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.036Fits in one request

Same cost

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 Command R (08-2024) and Gemma 4 26B A4B
SpecificationCohere Command R (08-2024)Google Gemma 4 26B A4B
MakerCohereGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 30, 2024April 3, 2026
Context window128K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.15
Output $/Mtok$0.60$0.60
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command R (08-2024) better than Gemma 4 26B A4B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Command R (08-2024) for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Command R (08-2024) or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Command R (08-2024) costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 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, Command R (08-2024) or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Gemma 4 26B A4B, with 262K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Command R (08-2024) vs Gemma 4 26B A4B comparison based on?

22 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Command R (08-2024)'s coding index rests on 0 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