Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 4 26B A4B
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 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. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Gemma 4 26B A4B share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 7 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 6 to Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 7
- Gemma 4 26B A4B only
- 6
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Gemma 4 26B A4B is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 5 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.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is priced at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 26B A4B. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 26B A4B.
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 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Δ | Gemma 4 26B A4B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured |
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4B43.4 |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4B73.8 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Gemma 4 26B A4B256K | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1140 | 761 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 26.8% | 11.0% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.0% | 13.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 634 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 16.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 43.6% | Not comparable |
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.5% | 25.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 83.8% | 79.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-HLESource | 17.5% | 18.3% | Gemma 4 26B A4B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.9% | -48.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 30.3% | 18.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 33.5% | 80.9% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 82.6% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 17.2% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 8.7% | Not comparable |
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 72.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Gemma 4 26B A4B 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.
What data is available for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Gemma 4 26B A4B today?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens Gemma 4 26B A4B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
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.