Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs MAI-Thinking-1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

57.96/100
No comparison
N/A
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported); MAI-Thinking-1 unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemma 4 26B A4B and MAI-Thinking-1 share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to Gemma 4 26B A4B; 12 to MAI-Thinking-1.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
1
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
19
MAI-Thinking-1 only
12
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Gemma 4 26B A4B makes more sense if its workflow fits your team better; MAI-Thinking-1 is the better fit if knowledge is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 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 26B A4B and MAI-Thinking-1 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

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 26B A4B and MAI-Thinking-1
CategoryGemma 4 26B A4BΔMAI-Thinking-1
KnowledgeGemma 4 26B A4B43.4Margin 29.1MAI-Thinking-172.5
AgenticGemma 4 26B A4BNot measuredMarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-146.0
CodingGemma 4 26B A4BNot measuredMarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-165.5
MathGemma 4 26B A4BNot measuredMarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-189.7
MultimodalGemma 4 26B A4B73.8MarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-1Not measured
Inst. FollowingGemma 4 26B A4BNot measuredMarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-185.0

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemma 4 26B A4BB · MAI-Thinking-1
  1. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 82.6%B 85%
    Winner: MAI-Thinking-1Δ 2.4
    MMLU-Pro: Gemma 4 26B A4B scored 82.6%; MAI-Thinking-1 scored 85%. MAI-Thinking-1 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 outputMAI-Thinking-1Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableMAI-Thinking-1Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableMAI-Thinking-1Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemma 4 26B A4B256KMAI-Thinking-1256KListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Result
AA Agentic IndexSource 11.0%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 43.6%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 13.1%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 761Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 46%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Result
AA Coding IndexSource 39.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 40.0%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 52.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 46.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Result
AA-LCRSource 55.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Graphwalks BFS 128KSource 90%Not comparable
KnowledgeMAI-Thinking-1 wins
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Result
MMLU-ProSource 82.6%85%MAI-Thinking-1 leads
HLESource 17.2%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 8.7%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.7%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 79.2%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 18.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -48.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 18.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.9%Not comparable
GPQASource 84.2%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 84.2%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 31%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Result
AIME 2025Source 97%Not comparable
AIME26Source 94.5%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 84.9%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Result
MMMU-ProSource 73.8%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 69.2%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMAI-Thinking-1Result
AA-IFBenchSource 72.4%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 85%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Gemma 4 26B A4B or MAI-Thinking-1?

Gemma 4 26B A4B and MAI-Thinking-1 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or MAI-Thinking-1?

MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 72.5 versus 43.4. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

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.