Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Gemma 4 E4B
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash #61 (Estimated); Gemma 4 E4B #155 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash and Gemma 4 E4B share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash; 12 to Gemma 4 E4B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- DeepSeek V4 Flash only
- 20
- Gemma 4 E4B only
- 12
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E4B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results 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
DeepSeek V4 Flash is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 58.88 to 43.2. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V4 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 E4B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Gemma 4 E4B is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Flash 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. DeepSeek V4 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E4B.
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 | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Δ | Gemma 4 E4B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash38.8 | Margin→ 28.6 | Gemma 4 E4B67.4 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash49.1 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 E4BNot measured |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash64.2 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 E4BNot measured |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash40.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 E4BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 83%B 69.4%Winner: DeepSeek V4 FlashΔ 13.6MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 83%; Gemma 4 E4B scored 69.4%. DeepSeek V4 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 71.2%B 58.6%Winner: DeepSeek V4 FlashΔ 12.6GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 71.2%; Gemma 4 E4B scored 58.6%. DeepSeek V4 Flash wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Gemma 4 E4B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash$0.14 input / $0.28 output | Gemma 4 E4B$0 input / $0 output | Gemma 4 E4B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available | Gemma 4 E4BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available | Gemma 4 E4BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash1M | Gemma 4 E4B128K | DeepSeek V4 Flash lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic6 benchmarks
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGemma 4 E4B wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Gemma 4 E4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 83% | 69.4% | DeepSeek V4 Flash leads |
| SimpleQASource | 23.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 71.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 71.2% | 58.6% | DeepSeek V4 Flash leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 71.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 8.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 12.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 57.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 3.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -20.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 8.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 31.3% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Gemma 4 E4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 44.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Gemma 4 E4B?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.88 to 43.2. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMLU-Pro, where the scores are 83% and 69.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Gemma 4 E4B?
Gemma 4 E4B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 67.4 versus 38.8. 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.