Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Qwen3.5 397B A17B leads Gemma 4 26B A4B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.4 to 16.7, and Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 3.9x less per output token ($0.60 vs $2.34 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 51 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 4 26B A4B Replace Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
54.7
Output $/M
$0.60
10
Qwen3.5 397B A17BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
57.1
Output $/M
$2.34
41
vs boards won of 51 shared

Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3.5 397B A17B: 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 3.9x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.34 per million) and work measured by LMArena WebDev or SciCode, where it leads.

Model AGemma 4 26B A4BGoogleNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.5 397B A17BQwenNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
51
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
4
Qwen3.5 397B A17B 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, Qwen3.5 397B A17B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 52.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 4 26B A4B 43.6% against Qwen3.5 397B A17B 95.6%, 52.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 against Qwen3.5 397B A17B $2.34 per million output tokens, 3.9x 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 A4BBarsQwen3.5 397B A17BTies
Coding17
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning17
Math21
Knowledge13
General520
All shared boards1041
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index17
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
LMArena WebDev13601400Qwen3.5 397B A17B
AA Coding Index39.3Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
SciCode40.0%44.8%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%40.9%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
WeirdML35.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
ALE-Bench927.2621.9Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: coding14461464Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: software and IT14541463Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena WebDev: React13511388Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena WebDev: HTML13621410Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
AA Intelligence Index16.721.4Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Epoch Capabilities Index141.9146.8Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
AA Agentic Index2.9Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom43.6%95.6%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
APEX-AgentsNot measured24.9%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%89.3%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.3%29.0%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)73.2%86.4%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured18.0%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14381448Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: expert14471462Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14481450Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: diagrams12641277Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: homework12931292Gemma 4 26B A4B
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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME82.2%88.9%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured31.2%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: math14701453Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14751454Gemma 4 26B A4B
MathArenaNot measured19.2%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
LMArena Text: science14461457Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14281455Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: legal and government14571441Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: business and finance14291435Qwen3.5 397B A17B
FACTS Benchmark Suite42.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1190Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1161Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1140Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1175Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1160Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1179Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1139Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index520
General benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
IFBench72.4%78.8%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.7%77.3%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
DTBench74.9%87.5%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMCA29.7%37.9%Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text14341437Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: instruction following14201424Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: creative writing14001402Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision12601262Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: English14441443Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: non-English14211430Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Chinese14951498Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1445Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1429Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1384Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: French14601462Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Spanish14151441Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Russian14341430Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1447Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14411446Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: longer queries14271441Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: writing and language14051415Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14031399Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision: English12561268Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: Chinese13121314Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: reading text12681271Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: humor12721262Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision: captioning12971230Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision: recognizing things11911265Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: creative writing12561260Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Neither model has a result on the other 19 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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
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
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.0016Fits 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
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.027Fits 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
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.101Fits 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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.5 397B A17B
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 3, 2026February 16, 2026
Context window262K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.39
Output $/Mtok$0.60$2.34
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B 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 3.9x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.34 per million) and work measured by LMArena WebDev or SciCode, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs $0.39 and $2.34. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Neither: both take 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B comparison based on?

51 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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next