Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
BenchAlign evidence: Gemma 4 26B A4B supported; Step 3.7 Flash estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.7 Flash share 17 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Gemma 4 26B A4B; 13 to Step 3.7 Flash.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- Gemma 4 26B A4B only
- 4
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 13
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.7 Flash is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Step 3.7 Flash is priced at $0.20 input / $1.15 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 26B A4B.
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 26B A4B | Δ | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 Flash66.4 |
| Coding | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 Flash56.3 |
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 26B A4B43.8 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 26B A4B73.8 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Step 3.7 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 output | Step 3.7 Flash$0.2 input / $1.15 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 26B A4B256K | Step 3.7 Flash256K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 11.0% | 21.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 43.6% | 98.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 13.1% | 25.9% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 761 | 1017 | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 59.5% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 49.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 51.57% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 14.8% | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 82.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 17.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 8.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.7% | 30.3% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 79.2% | 80.9% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-HLESource | 18.3% | 19.9% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -48.1% | -37.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 18.2% | 25.4% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.9% | 84.4% | Gemma 4 26B A4B leads |
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 72.4% | 67.3% | Gemma 4 26B A4B leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.7 Flash on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Gemma 4 26B A4B and Step 3.7 Flash today?
Gemma 4 26B A4B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Step 3.7 Flash: $0.20 input / $1.15 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.