Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs MiniMax M2.1

MiniMax M2.1 leads Gemma 4 26B A4B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 16.7, and Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 2.0x less per output token ($0.60 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 8 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
2
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
6
vs boards won of 8 shared

Gemma 4 26B A4B or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

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

Pick Gemma 4 26B A4B for output tokens 2.0x cheaper ($0.60 vs $1.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
8
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
47
MiniMax M2.1 only
26
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
Gemma 4 26B A4B not benchmarked, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 41.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 4 26B A4B 43.6% against MiniMax M2.1 85.4%, 41.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 2.0x apart.
Context window
Gemma 4 26B A4B takes 262K tokens, MiniMax M2.1 205K.

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
CategoryGemma 4 26B A4BBarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding11
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
General11
All shared boards26
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
LMArena WebDev1360Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
AA Coding Index39.3Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured81.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SciCode40.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%28.8%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-BenchNot measured36.6%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
WeirdML35.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
ALE-Bench927.2623.8Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: coding1446Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1454Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena WebDev: React1351Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1362Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index16.720.9MiniMax M2.1
Epoch Capabilities Index141.9Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Agentic Index2.9Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom43.6%85.4%MiniMax M2.1
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured78.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%83.0%MiniMax M2.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.3%23.2%MiniMax M2.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)73.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1438Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: expert1447Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1448Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1264Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: homework1293Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
AIMENot measured77.9%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured89.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured87.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured82.7Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured82.7%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME82.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: math1470Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1475Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured87.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured75.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured55.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured58.9%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured66.3%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured91.2%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured34.1%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1446Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1428Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1457Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1429Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite42.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1201Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1220Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1134Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1206Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1164Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1190Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1131Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured80.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
IFBench72.4%69.9%Gemma 4 26B A4B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.7%67.7%MiniMax M2.1
DTBench74.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMCA29.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text1434Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1420Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1400Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision1260Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: English1444Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1421Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1495Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: French1460Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1415Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1434Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1441Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1427Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1405Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1403Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: English1256Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1312Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1268Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: humor1272Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1297Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1191Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1256Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1Leader
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

Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.0004Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.0093Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.036Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.072Exceeds the context window

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 Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 4 26B A4BMiniMax M2.1
MakerGoogleMiniMax
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 3, 2026December 23, 2025
Context window262K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.60$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 4 26B A4B for output tokens 2.0x cheaper ($0.60 vs $1.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or MiniMax M2.1?

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 4 26B A4B or MiniMax M2.1?

Gemma 4 26B A4B, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 4 26B A4B vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 4 26B A4B's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and MiniMax M2.1's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next