Model comparison
Gemma 4 12B vs GPT-5.4 nano
Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 12B #137 (Estimated); GPT-5.4 nano #25 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 12B and GPT-5.4 nano share 15 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to Gemma 4 12B; 14 to GPT-5.4 nano.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 15
- Gemma 4 12B only
- 8
- GPT-5.4 nano only
- 14
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 nano if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 12B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.4 nano is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 66.79 to 47.29. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4 nano gives you the larger context window at 400K, 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 | Gemma 4 12B | Δ | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin← 56.5 | GPT-5.4 nano21.0 |
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin← 33.7 | GPT-5.4 nano43.8 |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 12B69.1 | Margin← 3.0 | GPT-5.4 nano66.1 |
| Agentic | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 nano42.9 |
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 12B43.4 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 nanoNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 78.8%B 82.8%Winner: GPT-5.4 nanoΔ 4GPQA: Gemma 4 12B scored 78.8%; GPT-5.4 nano scored 82.8%. GPT-5.4 nano wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 69.1%B 66.1%Winner: Gemma 4 12BΔ 3MMMU-Pro: Gemma 4 12B scored 69.1%; GPT-5.4 nano scored 66.1%. Gemma 4 12B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.4 nano | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 12BNot available | GPT-5.4 nano$0.2 input / $1.25 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 12BNot available | GPT-5.4 nano191 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 12BNot available | GPT-5.4 nano3.64 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 12B256K | GPT-5.4 nano400K | GPT-5.4 nano lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.4 nano | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 36.3% | 76% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 46.3% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 39% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 56.1% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 35.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 27.5% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 24.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 30.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1100 | Not comparable |
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGemma 4 12B wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.4 nano | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 78.8% | 82.8% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 78.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 77.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 5.2% | 24.3% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| MMMLUSource | 83.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 22.0% | 38.2% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 75.3% | 81.7% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| AA-HLESource | 14.8% | 26.5% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -51.9% | -29.5% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 16.0% | 25.4% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.8% | 73.6% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
| HLESource | — | 37.7% | Not comparable |
MathGemma 4 12B wins3 benchmarks
MultimodalGemma 4 12B wins5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.4 nano | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.5% | 75.9% | GPT-5.4 nano leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.4 nano?
GPT-5.4 nano is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 66.79 to 47.29. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 78.8% and 82.8%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.4 nano?
Gemma 4 12B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 43.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.4 nano?
Gemma 4 12B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 21. GPT-5.4 nano stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.4 nano?
Gemma 4 12B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.1 versus 66.1. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-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.