Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Step 3.5 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 31 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
16.7
Output $/M
$0.60
25
Step 3.5 FlashStepFun
Coding
No data
Overall
17.0
Output $/M
$0.30
6
vs boards won of 31 shared

Decision reading

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

Gemma 4 26B A4B has the edge where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
31
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
23
Step 3.5 Flash only
4
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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, Step 3.5 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 50.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 4 26B A4B 43.6% against Step 3.5 Flash 94.4%, 50.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 4 26B A4B $0.60 against Step 3.5 Flash $0.30 per million output tokens, 2.0x 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 A4BBarsStep 3.5 FlashTies
Coding21
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning32
Math20
Knowledge40
General141
All shared boards256
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index21
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
LMArena WebDev1360Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
AA Coding Index39.3Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
SciCode40.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%32.6%Step 3.5 Flash
WeirdML35.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
ALE-Bench927.2Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: coding14461436Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: software and IT14541434Gemma 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 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index16.717.0Step 3.5 Flash
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 Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Agentic Index2.9Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom43.6%94.4%Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%83.1%Step 3.5 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.3%24.5%Step 3.5 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)73.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14381411Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: expert14471421Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14481421Gemma 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 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
OTIS Mock AIME82.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: math14701408Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14751421Gemma 4 26B A4B
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
LMArena Text: science14461415Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14281408Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: legal and government14571408Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: business and finance14291394Gemma 4 26B A4B
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index141
General benchmarks for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
IFBench72.4%66.5%Gemma 4 26B A4B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.7%63.0%Gemma 4 26B A4B
DTBench74.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMCA29.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text14341403Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: instruction following14201385Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: creative writing14001357Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Vision1260Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 26B A4B measured
LMArena Text: English14441417Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: non-English14211385Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Chinese14951446Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1405Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1353Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1351Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: French14601421Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: Spanish14151419Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Russian14341385Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1389Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14411404Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: longer queries14271402Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: writing and language14051372Gemma 4 26B A4B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14031360Gemma 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 Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
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
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.0093Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0059Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.036Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.023Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash 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 Step 3.5 Flash
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 4 26B A4BStepFun Step 3.5 Flash
MakerGoogleStepFun
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 3, 2026January 29, 2026
Context window262K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.60$0.30
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 Step 3.5 Flash for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Gemma 4 26B A4B has the edge where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Neither: both take 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Step 3.5 Flash comparison based on?

31 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 4 26B A4B's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Step 3.5 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next