Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) vs Gemma 4 12B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

64.18/100
Margin
16.9pts
← winning
47.29/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) #35 (Estimated); Gemma 4 12B #137 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) and Gemma 4 12B share 12 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive); 11 to Gemma 4 12B.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
12
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) only
4
Gemma 4 12B only
11
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) and Gemma 4 12B is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 12B.

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 scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) and Gemma 4 12B
CategoryClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)ΔGemma 4 12B
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 12B43.4
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 12B77.5
MathClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 12B77.5
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 12B69.1

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Not availableGemma 4 12BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Not availableGemma 4 12BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Not availableGemma 4 12BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)1MGemma 4 12B256KClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
APEX-Agents-AASource 33.0%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 92.1%36.3%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 51.9%38.2%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
AA-LCRSource 70.7%55.3%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
CritPtSource 12.6%0.0%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
BBHSource 53%Not comparable
MRCRv2Source 43.4%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 43.7%22.0%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 89.6%75.3%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
AA-HLESource 36.7%14.8%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 13.5%-51.9%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 46.4%16.0%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 61.3%80.8%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
GPQASource 78.8%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 78.8%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 77.2%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 5.2%Not comparable
MMMLUSource 83.4%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
AIME26Source 77.5%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource 92.2%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.4%69.7%Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1325Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 69.1%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 79.7%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 48.7%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive)Gemma 4 12BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 53.1%73.5%Gemma 4 12B leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive) and Gemma 4 12B on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.