Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Gemma 4 E4B
~47
1/8 categoriesK-Exaone
~50
Winner · 0/8 categoriesGemma 4 E4B· K-Exaone
Pick K-Exaone if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E4B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
K-Exaone has the cleaner overall profile here, landing at 50 versus 47. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
K-Exaone gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E4B.
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 E4B | K-Exaone |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| CodingGemma 4 E4B wins | ||
| LiveCodeBench | 52% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 49.4% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 52.6% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| BBH | 33.1% | — |
| MRCRv2 | 25.4% | — |
| Knowledge | ||
| GPQA | 58.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 69.4% | — |
| Instruction Following | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| Multilingual | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| Mathematics | ||
| Coming soon | ||
K-Exaone is ahead overall, 50 to 47.
Gemma 4 E4B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 52 versus 49.4. K-Exaone stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.