Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507

Gemma 4 26B A4B leads Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 16.7 to 12.0, and Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 1.3x less per output token ($0.60 vs $0.775 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 11 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
6
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.775
5
vs boards won of 11 shared

Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507: 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 1.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $0.775 per million) and work measured by SciCode or WeirdML, where it leads.

Shared results
11
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
44
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 only
13
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, Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 9.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
IFBench: Gemma 4 26B A4B 72.4% against Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 51.2%, 21.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 against Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 $0.775 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
Both take 262K tokens.

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 A4BBarsQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Ties
Coding12
Intelligence10
Agentic work01
Reasoning20
General22
All shared boards65
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
LMArena WebDev1360Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
AA Coding Index39.3Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.8%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
SciCode40.0%41.4%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%15.2%Gemma 4 26B A4B
WeirdML35.2%38.7%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
ALE-Bench927.2Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
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 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index16.712.0Gemma 4 26B A4B
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 Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Agentic Index2.9Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom43.6%53.2%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured52.1%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%79.0%Gemma 4 26B A4B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.3%15.9%Gemma 4 26B A4B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)73.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
ARC-AGINot measured11.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured1.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 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 13 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured91.0Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured91.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 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 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 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 14 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1058Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured963Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured951Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1070Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured994Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1038Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
General benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
IFBench72.4%51.2%Gemma 4 26B A4B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.7%72.0%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
DTBench74.9%78.4%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
LMCA29.7%23.5%Gemma 4 26B A4B
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 23 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 Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
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
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507$0.0005Fits 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
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507$0.0096Fits 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
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507$0.037Fits 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 Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 3, 2026July 21, 2025
Context window262K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.145
Output $/Mtok$0.60$0.775
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B better than Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 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 1.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $0.775 per million) and work measured by SciCode or WeirdML, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507?

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs $0.145 and $0.775. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507?

Neither: both take 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 comparison based on?

11 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 Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next