Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Gemma 4 26B A4B

Gemma 4 26B A4B leads Gemini 2.5 Pro on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 16.7 to 16.1, and Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 16.7x less per output token ($0.60 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 53 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemini 2.5 Pro Replace Gemma 4 26B A4B
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle
Coding
19.1
Overall
41.8
Output $/M
$10.00
42
Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
11
vs boards won of 53 shared

Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemma 4 26B A4B: which to pick

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 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 16.7x cheaper ($0.60 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena WebDev or AA Coding Index, where it leads.

Model AGemini 2.5 ProGoogle19.1/1003 independent benchmarks$0.64 per solved taskModel BGemma 4 26B A4BGoogleNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
53
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
37
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
2
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
Gemini 2.5 Pro 19.1 from 3 benchmarks, Gemma 4 26B A4B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 9.3 points apart on average over 8 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
IFBench: Gemini 2.5 Pro 48.7% against Gemma 4 26B A4B 72.4%, 23.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Pro $10.00 against Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 per million output tokens, 16.7x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes 1.05M 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
CategoryGemini 2.5 ProBarsGemma 4 26B A4BTies
Coding53
Intelligence11
Agentic work11
Reasoning71
Math12
Knowledge50
General223
All shared boards4211
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index53
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
SWE-bench Verified53.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena WebDev12261360Gemma 4 26B A4B
AA Coding Index33.339.3Gemma 4 26B A4B
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)54.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)0.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)80.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
SciCode46.3%40.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%25.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Terminal-Bench32.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
GSO-Bench3.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
WeirdML54.0%35.2%Gemini 2.5 Pro
ALE-BenchNot measured927.2Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: coding14521446Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: software and IT14591454Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1351Only Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML12351362Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena WebDev: from an image1285Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Intelligence Index16.116.7Gemma 4 26B A4B
Epoch Capabilities Index145.1141.9Gemini 2.5 Pro
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Agentic Index1.62.9Gemma 4 26B A4B
τ²-Bench Telecom54.1%43.6%Gemini 2.5 Pro
GDPval23.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
DeepResearch Bench41.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Vending-Bench 2$574Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
BrowseComp-Plus29.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index71
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.4%79.2%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)22.5%19.3%Gemini 2.5 Pro
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)85.3%73.2%Gemini 2.5 Pro
ARC-AGI41.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
ARC-AGI-24.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14551438Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: expert14521447Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14531448Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: diagrams12741264Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: homework12811293Gemma 4 26B A4B
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
AA Math Index87.7Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)87.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
OTIS Mock AIME84.7%82.2%Gemini 2.5 Pro
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 324.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
FrontierMath, tier 40.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: math14501470Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14541475Gemma 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 index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)63.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)60.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MedCode (Vals AI)50.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: science14801446Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14761428Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: legal and government14801457Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: business and finance14391429Gemini 2.5 Pro
FACTS Benchmark Suite61.5%42.7%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
Design Arena: websites1167Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Design Arena: UI components1137Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Design Arena: game dev1111Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Design Arena: data viz1222Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Design Arena: 3D1080Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Design Arena: all code categories1152Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index223
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 4 26B A4BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)41.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
IFBench48.7%72.4%Gemma 4 26B A4B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.0%65.7%Gemini 2.5 Pro
DTBench82.4%74.9%Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMCA34.8%29.7%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)83.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text14581434Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: instruction following14371420Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: creative writing14541400Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision12631260Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: English14581444Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: non-English14521421Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Chinese15071495Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: German1487Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1461Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: Korean1434Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: French14731460Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Spanish14741415Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Russian14611434Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Polish1479Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14531441Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: longer queries14491427Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: writing and language14541405Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14411403Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: English12611256Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: Chinese13001312Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision: reading text12701268Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: humor12621272Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision: captioning13041297Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: recognizing things12831191Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: creative writing12651256Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Document1421Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGemma 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

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.0063Fits 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

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.092Fits 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

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.350Fits 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 Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle Gemma 4 26B A4B
MakerGoogleGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 17, 2025April 3, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.15
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.60
Coding index19.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it31
Cost per solved task$0.64Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Gemma 4 26B A4B for coding?

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 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 16.7x cheaper ($0.60 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena WebDev or AA Coding Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Pro only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemma 4 26B A4B?

Gemini 2.5 Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Gemma 4 26B A4B comparison based on?

53 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Pro'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