Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.2 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B

DeepSeek V3.2 leads Gemma 4 26B A4B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.5 to 16.7, and Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 1.5x less per output token ($0.60 vs $0.88 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 38 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek
Coding
30.0
Overall
37.9
Output $/M
$0.88
16
Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
22
vs boards won of 38 shared

DeepSeek V3.2 or Gemma 4 26B A4B: which to pick

Only DeepSeek V3.2 has a coding score, 30.0 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 1.5x cheaper ($0.60 vs $0.88 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 164K tokens).

Shared results
38
DeepSeek V3.2 only
37
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
17
Like-for-like categories
7 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
DeepSeek V3.2 30.0 from 3 benchmarks, Gemma 4 26B A4B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 47.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: DeepSeek V3.2 90.6% against Gemma 4 26B A4B 43.6%, 47.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.2 $0.88 against Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.2 takes 164K 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
CategoryDeepSeek V3.2BarsGemma 4 26B A4BTies
Coding52
Intelligence20
Agentic work10
Reasoning23
Math02
Knowledge13
General512
All shared boards1622
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index52
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
SWE-bench Verified70.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual59.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena WebDev13621360DeepSeek V3.2
AA Coding Index44.239.3DeepSeek V3.2
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)80.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)67.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)5.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SciCodeNot measured40.0%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)35.6%25.0%DeepSeek V3.2
Terminal-Bench39.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
WeirdMLNot measured35.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
ALE-BenchNot measured927.2Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: coding14531446DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: software and IT14491454Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena WebDev: React13501351Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena WebDev: HTML13711362DeepSeek V3.2
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Intelligence Index21.516.7DeepSeek V3.2
Epoch Capabilities Index146.1141.9DeepSeek V3.2
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured2.9Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.6%43.6%DeepSeek V3.2
APEX-Agents21.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2$1,034Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
GPQA Diamond80.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.0%79.2%DeepSeek V3.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)24.6%19.3%DeepSeek V3.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured73.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
ARC-AGI57.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
ARC-AGI-24.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14341438Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: expert14361447Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14461448Gemma 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 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AIME84.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)86.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
AA Math Index92.0Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)92.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured82.2%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: math14351470Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14401475Gemma 4 26B A4B
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
MMLU Pro84.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)76.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)55.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)51.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)68.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: science14461446Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14401428DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: legal and government14251457Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: business and finance14101429Gemma 4 26B A4B
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured42.7%Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
Design Arena: websites1175Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: UI components1146Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: game dev1131Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1158Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: 3D1132Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1163Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: SVG1032Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1083Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index512
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 4 26B A4BLeader
IFBench60.7%72.4%Gemma 4 26B A4B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.3%65.7%DeepSeek V3.2
DTBench85.6%74.9%DeepSeek V3.2
LMCA28.8%29.7%Gemma 4 26B A4B
CL-bench12.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CL-bench Life7.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text14251434Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: instruction following14131420Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: creative writing14001400Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena VisionNot measured1260Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: English14391444Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: non-English14091421Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Chinese14551495Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: German1413Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1374Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1370Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: French14291460Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Spanish14241415DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: Russian14241434Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Polish1419Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14271441Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: longer queries14281427DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: writing and language14071405DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13951403Gemma 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 15 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemma 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

DeepSeek V3.2$0.0007Fits 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

DeepSeek V3.2$0.017Fits 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

DeepSeek V3.2$0.067Exceeds the context window
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 DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemma 4 26B A4B
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.2Google Gemma 4 26B A4B
MakerDeepSeekGoogle
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 1, 2025April 3, 2026
Context window164K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.29$0.15
Output $/Mtok$0.88$0.60
Coding index30.0Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it31
Cost per solved task$0.99Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.2 better than Gemma 4 26B A4B for coding?

Only DeepSeek V3.2 has a coding score, 30.0 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 1.5x cheaper ($0.60 vs $0.88 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 164K tokens).

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.2 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

DeepSeek V3.2 costs $0.29 per million input tokens and $0.88 per million output tokens; Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for DeepSeek V3.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.2 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Gemma 4 26B A4B, with 262K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.2 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V3.2's coding index rests on 3 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