Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

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

Gemma 4 26B A4B leads Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 16.7 to 12.7, and Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 5.8x less per output token ($0.60 vs $3.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 31 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 4 26B A4B Replace Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
25
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
52.9
Output $/M
$3.50
6
vs boards won of 31 shared

Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 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 5.8x cheaper ($0.60 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 128K tokens).

Model AGemma 4 26B A4BGoogleNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507QwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
31
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
24
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 only
15
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
Gemma 4 26B A4B not benchmarked, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 7.6 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
AA Coding Index: Gemma 4 26B A4B 39.3 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 22.1, 17.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $3.50 per million output tokens, 5.8x apart.
Context window
Gemma 4 26B A4B takes 262K tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 128K.

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 Thinking 2507Ties
Coding31
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning22
Math21
Knowledge31
General131
All shared boards256
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index31
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
LMArena WebDev1360Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
AA Coding Index39.322.1Gemma 4 26B A4B
SciCode40.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
WeirdML35.2%41.0%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
ALE-Bench927.2Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: coding14461424Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: software and IT14541431Gemma 4 26B A4B
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 33 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 Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index16.712.7Gemma 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 index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Agentic Index2.91.3Gemma 4 26B A4B
τ²-Bench Telecom43.6%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured-$11Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)73.2%80.1%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14381416Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: expert14471463Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14481432Gemma 4 26B A4B
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
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
Math benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
OTIS Mock AIME82.2%86.7%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: math14701412Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14751435Gemma 4 26B A4B
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured40.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: science14461433Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14281456Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: legal and government14571415Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: business and finance14291413Gemma 4 26B A4B
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 Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1052Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured942Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured956Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured950Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured997Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1032Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index131
General benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
IFBench72.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
DTBench74.9%80.3%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMCA29.7%29.3%Gemma 4 26B A4B
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured75.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured82.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text14341415Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: instruction following14201386Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: creative writing14001384Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision1260Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: English14441429Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: non-English14211397Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Chinese14951481Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1408Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1386Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1375Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: French1460Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: Spanish14151389Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Russian14341401Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1390Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14411406Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: longer queries14271400Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: writing and language14051388Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14031370Gemma 4 26B A4B
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 17 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 Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 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 Thinking 2507$0.0022Fits 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 Thinking 2507$0.033Fits 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 Thinking 2507$0.125Exceeds 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 Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 4 26B A4BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 3, 2026July 25, 2025
Context window262K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.60$3.50
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 Thinking 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 5.8x cheaper ($0.60 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 128K tokens).

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

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.45 and $3.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

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

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

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

31 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 Thinking 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next