Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemma 4 12B vs Llama 4 Maverick

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.

47.29/100
Margin
23.8pts
← winning
23.49/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 12B #137 (Estimated); Llama 4 Maverick #191 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemma 4 12B and Llama 4 Maverick share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Gemma 4 12B; 6 to Llama 4 Maverick.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
12
Gemma 4 12B only
11
Llama 4 Maverick only
6
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Gemma 4 12B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Llama 4 Maverick only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Gemma 4 12B is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 47.29 to 23.49. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Gemma 4 12B's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 77.5 against 0.7.

Gemma 4 12B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Llama 4 Maverick 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. Llama 4 Maverick gives you 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 Gemma 4 12B and Llama 4 Maverick
CategoryGemma 4 12BΔLlama 4 Maverick
MathGemma 4 12B77.5Margin 76.8Llama 4 Maverick0.7
ReasoningGemma 4 12B43.4MarginNo overlapLlama 4 MaverickNot measured
KnowledgeGemma 4 12B77.5MarginNo overlapLlama 4 MaverickNot measured
MultimodalGemma 4 12B69.1MarginNo overlapLlama 4 MaverickNot measured

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemma 4 12BNot availableLlama 4 Maverick$0 input / $0 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemma 4 12BNot availableLlama 4 Maverick121 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemma 4 12BNot availableLlama 4 Maverick0.95 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemma 4 12B256KLlama 4 Maverick1MLlama 4 Maverick lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 36.3%17.8%Gemma 4 12B leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 1.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 0.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource -16Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickResult
AA-SciCodeSource 38.2%33.1%Gemma 4 12B leads
AA Coding IndexSource 16.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickResult
BBHSource 53%Not comparable
MRCRv2Source 43.4%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 55.3%46.0%Gemma 4 12B leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.0%Tie
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickResult
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
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 22.0%14.3%Gemma 4 12B leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 75.3%67.1%Gemma 4 12B leads
AA-HLESource 14.8%4.8%Gemma 4 12B leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -51.9%-41.8%Llama 4 Maverick leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 16.0%24.3%Llama 4 Maverick leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.8%87.3%Gemma 4 12B leads
MathGemma 4 12B wins
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickResult
AIME26Source 77.5%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 0.690%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickResult
MMMU-ProSource 69.1%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 79.7%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 48.7%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 69.7%62.1%Gemma 4 12B leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 901Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BLlama 4 MaverickResult
AA-IFBenchSource 73.5%43.0%Gemma 4 12B leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or Llama 4 Maverick?

Gemma 4 12B is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 47.29 to 23.49.

Which is better for math, Gemma 4 12B or Llama 4 Maverick?

Gemma 4 12B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 0.7. Llama 4 Maverick stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

Gemma 4 12B
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Llama 4 Maverick
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$2,610
Break-even
Model the full break-even

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.