Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemma 4 26B A4B
55
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
56
Verified leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 26B A4B unranked · Qwen3.5-35B-A3B #20
Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 26B A4B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Knowledge
+30.1 difference
Gemma 4 26B A4B
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
$0 / $0
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
256K
262K
Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 26B A4B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B finishes one point ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 56 to 55. That is enough to call, but not enough to treat as a blowout. This matchup comes down to a few meaningful edges rather than one model dominating the board.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 79.3 against 49.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MMLU-Pro, 82.6% to 85.3%.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 56 to 55. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMLU-Pro, where the scores are 82.6% and 85.3%.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.3 versus 49.2. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.