Model comparison
Gemma 4 12B vs o3
Head-to-head evidence from 12 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); o3 #131 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 12B and o3 share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Gemma 4 12B; 4 to o3.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Gemma 4 12B only
- 11
- o3 only
- 4
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick o3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 12B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window.
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
o3 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 47.89 versus 47.29. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Gemma 4 12B gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for o3.
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 | o3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin← 63.0 | o314.5 |
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 12B43.4 | MarginNo overlap | o3Not measured |
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | MarginNo overlap | o3Not measured |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 12B69.1 | MarginNo overlap | o3Not measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 12B | o3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 12BNot available | o3$2 input / $8 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 12BNot available | o3118 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 12BNot available | o35.38 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 12B256K | o3200K | Gemma 4 12B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 36.3% | 80.7% | o3 leads |
Coding1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | 38.2% | 41.0% | o3 leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 30.4% | o3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 75.3% | 82.7% | o3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 14.8% | 20.0% | o3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -51.9% | -15.3% | o3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 16.0% | 38.4% | o3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.8% | 87.1% | Gemma 4 12B leads |
MathGemma 4 12B wins4 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.5% | 71.4% | Gemma 4 12B leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or o3?
o3 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 47.89 to 47.29.
Which is better for math, Gemma 4 12B or o3?
Gemma 4 12B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 14.5. o3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.