Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

See the free Radar Brief
Google logo
Model A
Gemma 4 12B

Google

46.64/100

Estimated · Public rank #161

90% interval 35.158.2

Gemma 4 12B vs ZAYA1-8B

Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Zyphra logo
Model B
ZAYA1-8B

Zyphra

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.

5 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Gemma 4 12B

    Gemma 4 12B has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    ZAYA1-8B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Gemma 4 12B and ZAYA1-8B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. ZAYA1-8B does not fit this workload in one request. Gemma 4 12B has no comparable published API token rate. ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
5
Gemma 4 12B only
7
ZAYA1-8B only
6
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

3 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Directional only
Gemma 4 12B
47.9
Estimated · #81/151
ZAYA1-8B
48.1
Estimated · #79/151
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 1 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
Gemma 4 12B
40.4
Supported · #138/181
ZAYA1-8B
45.3
Estimated · #116/181
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 5 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Instruction following

Directional only
Gemma 4 12B
89.8
#21/120
ZAYA1-8B
35.6
#108/120
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Not comparable
Gemma 4 12B
46.6
Estimated · #97/183
ZAYA1-8B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 1 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Gemma 4 12B
34.0
Unranked · 4 rankable rows
ZAYA1-8B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Gemma 4 12B
57.6
Unranked · 1 rankable row
ZAYA1-8B
62.6
Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Gemma 4 12B
Not ranked
ZAYA1-8B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Gemma 4 12B
26.1
#44/48
ZAYA1-8B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Gemma 4 12B
API rate not published
Fits in one request
ZAYA1-8B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Gemma 4 12B has no comparable published API token rate. ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 4 12B
API rate not published
Fits in one request
ZAYA1-8B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Gemma 4 12B has no comparable published API token rate. ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 4 12B
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable
ZAYA1-8B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Does not fit in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

ZAYA1-8B does not fit this workload in one request. Gemma 4 12B has no comparable published API token rate. ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

API model ID

Gemma 4 12B

Not sourced

ZAYA1-8B

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Gemma 4 12B

No comparable hosted API rate

ZAYA1-8B

No comparable hosted API rate

Reasoning profile

Gemma 4 12B

Reasoning

ZAYA1-8B

Reasoning

Weight access

Gemma 4 12B

Open Weight

ZAYA1-8B

Open Weight

License

Gemma 4 12B

Open Weight

ZAYA1-8B

Open Weight

Release date

Gemma 4 12B

2026-06-03

ZAYA1-8B

2026-05-05

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Gemma 4 12B has the larger documented window (256K).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence18 rows

Agentic

  • BFCL v4

    Gemma 4 12B
    ZAYA1-8B39.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Gemma 4 12B72.0%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B65.8%
    Source

    Gemma 4 12B leads this result

Reasoning

  • BBH

    Gemma 4 12B53%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCRv2

    Gemma 4 12B43.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Gemma 4 12B78.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B71%
    Source

    Gemma 4 12B leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Gemma 4 12B78.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B71.0%
    Source

    Gemma 4 12B leads this result

  • MMLU-Pro

    Gemma 4 12B77.2%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B74.2%
    Source

    Gemma 4 12B leads this result

  • HLE w/o tools

    Gemma 4 12B5.2%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMLU

    Gemma 4 12B83.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME26

    Gemma 4 12B77.5%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B89.1%
    Source

    ZAYA1-8B leads this result

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Gemma 4 12B
    ZAYA1-8B71.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IMOAnswerBench

    Gemma 4 12B
    ZAYA1-8B59.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Apex

    Gemma 4 12B
    ZAYA1-8B32.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    Gemma 4 12B69.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision

    Gemma 4 12B79.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B

    Not directly comparable

  • MedXpertQA (MM)

    Gemma 4 12B48.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Gemma 4 12B
    ZAYA1-8B85.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    Gemma 4 12B
    ZAYA1-8B52.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or ZAYA1-8B?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Gemma 4 12B or ZAYA1-8B?

ZAYA1-8B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemma 4 12B or ZAYA1-8B?

ZAYA1-8B scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 48.1 to 47.9. Gemma 4 12B and ZAYA1-8B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Gemma 4 12B or ZAYA1-8B?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Gemma 4 12B or ZAYA1-8B?

Gemma 4 12B has the larger documented context window: 256K, compared with 131K.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 4, 2026

Watch Gemma 4 12B vs ZAYA1-8B

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.