Model comparison
Celeris-1 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Celeris-1 unranked (Not scored); Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and Gemma 4 26B A4B share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Celeris-1; 19 to Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Celeris-1 only
- 0
- Gemma 4 26B A4B only
- 19
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Celeris-1 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Gemma 4 26B A4B is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 256K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Celeris-1 and Gemma 4 26B A4B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Celeris-1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 26B A4B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Gemma 4 26B A4B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Celeris-1 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemma 4 26B A4B gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 8K for Celeris-1.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Celeris-1 | Δ | Gemma 4 26B A4B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Celeris-175.9 | Margin← 32.5 | Gemma 4 26B A4B43.4 |
| Multimodal | Celeris-1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4B73.8 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 75.9%B 82.6%Winner: Gemma 4 26B A4BΔ 6.7MMLU-Pro: Celeris-1 scored 75.9%; Gemma 4 26B A4B scored 82.6%. Gemma 4 26B A4B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Celeris-1$2 input / $6 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Celeris-1Not available | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Celeris-1Not available | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Celeris-18K | Gemma 4 26B A4B256K | Gemma 4 26B A4B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding2 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeCeleris-1 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 75.9% | 82.6% | Gemma 4 26B A4B leads |
| HLESource | — | 17.2% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 8.7% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 25.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 79.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 18.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -48.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 18.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 80.9% | Not comparable |
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 72.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Celeris-1 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
Celeris-1 and Gemma 4 26B A4B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Celeris-1 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
Celeris-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.9 versus 43.4. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.