Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Gemma 4 E2B
~39
2/8 categoriesLlama 4 Maverick
39
2/8 categoriesGemma 4 E2B· Llama 4 Maverick
Treat this as a split decision. Gemma 4 E2B makes more sense if coding is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile; Llama 4 Maverick is the better fit if reasoning is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Gemma 4 E2B and Llama 4 Maverick finish on the same overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Gemma 4 E2B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Llama 4 Maverick is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Llama 4 Maverick gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E2B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 E2B | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | — | 37% |
| BrowseComp | — | 51% |
| OSWorld-Verified | — | 38% |
| CodingGemma 4 E2B wins | ||
| LiveCodeBench | 44% | 15% |
| HumanEval | — | 38% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 13% |
| SWE-bench Pro | — | 17% |
| Multimodal & GroundedLlama 4 Maverick wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 44.2% | 59% |
| OfficeQA Pro | — | 54% |
| ReasoningLlama 4 Maverick wins | ||
| BBH | 21.9% | 63% |
| MRCRv2 | 19.1% | 63% |
| MuSR | — | 42% |
| LongBench v2 | — | 63% |
| KnowledgeGemma 4 E2B wins | ||
| GPQA | 43.4% | 45% |
| MMLU-Pro | 60% | 53% |
| MMLU | — | 46% |
| SuperGPQA | — | 43% |
| HLE | — | 4% |
| FrontierScience | — | 45% |
| SimpleQA | — | 44% |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | — | 68% |
| Multilingual | ||
| MGSM | — | 63% |
| MMLU-ProX | — | 58% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2023 | — | 46% |
| AIME 2024 | — | 48% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 47% |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | — | 42% |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | — | 44% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 43% |
| BRUMO 2025 | — | 45% |
| MATH-500 | — | 59% |
Gemma 4 E2B and Llama 4 Maverick are tied on overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Gemma 4 E2B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 54.1 versus 37. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemma 4 E2B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 44 versus 15.3. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Llama 4 Maverick has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 57.4 versus 19.1. Inside this category, MRCRv2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Llama 4 Maverick has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 56.8 versus 44.2. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.