Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Data as of October 20, 2026 · How the score is built

CurrentOpen WeightReasoning

Released Jun 3, 2026256K context

Gemma 4 12B

Decision readingGemma 4 12B scores 36.1 out of 100 and ranks #159 of 227. This profile shows 12 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #45. No comparable first-party API price is published in the catalog.

Released Jun 3, 2026 — see all recent releases

Decision snapshot

Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.

Capability

36.1/100

field median 49.8#159 of 227 ranked models

Public

#159of 227

Verified —

Price

Not listed

input median $0.72No comparable first-party hosted token rate

Speed

Not measured

field median 93.5 tok/sTime to first token not measured

Context

256Ktokens

field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately

Strongest published evidence

Multimodal & Grounded ranks #45. Particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.

Validate before choosing

12 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.

Source-linked · 12 displayable benchmark rows

Category score record

Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.

Category scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticWeight 22%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
CodingRank #115 of 152Percentile 25thWeight 20%1 benchmarkVerified
22.7
ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified
51.8
MultimodalRank #45 of 55Percentile 19thWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified
59.4
KnowledgeRank #137 of 187Percentile 27thWeight 12%5 benchmarksVerified
35.4
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified
61.3

12 of 726 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100

Coverage details

How much of this is verified

Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.

  1. AgenticNot measured
  2. Coding1/1 verified
  3. Reasoning1/1 verified
  4. Multimodal4/4 verified
  5. Knowledge5/5 verified
  6. MultilingualNot measured
  7. Inst. FollowingNot measured
  8. Math1/1 verified
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured

Capability shape

Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.

Gemma 4 12B category percentile values

  • AgenticNot eligible
  • Coding25th percentile
  • ReasoningNot eligible
  • Multimodal19th percentile
  • Knowledge27th percentile
  • MultilingualNot eligible
  • Instruction followingNot eligible
  • MathNot eligible

The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.

Eligible category ranks

  1. AgenticNot ranked
  2. Coding#115/152
  3. ReasoningNot ranked
  4. Multimodal#45/55
  5. Knowledge#137/187
  6. MultilingualNot ranked
  7. Inst. FollowingNot ranked
  8. MathNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible

Benchmark ledger

Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.

Coding1 row
Coding benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
LiveCodeBench v6Score72.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.2%

Gap21.2 behindWeightDisplay only
Reasoning1 row
Reasoning benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MRCRv2Score43.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.6%

Gap50.2 behindWeightWeighted 20%
Multimodal4 rows
Multimodal benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding ProScore69.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash · 83.6%

Gap14.5 behindWeightWeighted 40%
ExtractBench (LlamaIndex)ExtractBench: schema-guided enterprise document extraction (LlamaIndex leaderboard)Score45.39%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 94.68%

Gap49.3 behindWeightDisplay only
MathVisionScore79.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 95.2%

Gap15.5 behindWeightDisplay only
MedXpertQA (MM)MedXpertQA MultimodalScore48.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 80.4%

Gap31.7 behindWeightDisplay only
Knowledge5 rows
Knowledge benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without toolsScore5.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 64.4%

Gap59.2 behindWeight7% ref. weight
MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding ProfessionalScore77.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6%

Gap12.4 behindWeight6% ref. weight
GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&AScore78.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96%

Gap17.2 behindWeight3% ref. weight
GPQA-DGPQA DiamondScore78.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0%

Gap17.2 behindWeightDisplay only
MMMLUScore83.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Interfaze Beta · 90.9%

Gap7.5 behindWeightDisplay only
Math1 row
Math benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
AIME26AIME 2026Score77.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 99.2%

Gap21.7 behindWeightWeighted 25%

Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value

All 12 rows

Lineage

The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.

Spec sheet

Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.

Weights model ID
google/gemma-4-12BGoogle gemma-4-12B model card
Maximum output
Not sourced yet
Knowledge cutoff
Not sourced yet
Input modalities
text, image, audio, videoGoogle Gemma 4 model documentation
Parameters
12B total · DENSE
Availability
open weightsGoogle gemma-4-12B model card
Cloud regions
Not tracked yet
API capabilities
Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
Prompt caching
Not documented in the pricing record
Self-host
Open weights available; hardware estimate not sourced
Rate limits
Not tracked yet

How to read this profile

The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.

Gemma 4 12B ranks #159 of 227 on the public leaderboard with a score of 36.1/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.

Gemma 4 12B is a open weight model with a 256K context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.

Official exact-value snapshot from Google's June 3, 2026 Gemma 4 12B launch post and Hugging Face model card. BenchLM maps schema-equivalent rows from the published table: MMLU Pro, GPQA Diamond, HLE no tools, LiveCodeBench v6, AIME 2026, MMMLU, MMMU Pro, MATH-Vision, MedXpertQA MM, and MRCR v2. Codeforces, Tau2 average, BigBench Extra Hard (no matching key), OmniDocBench edit distance, and audio rows are not mapped.

Gemma 4 12B sits in the Gemma 4 family with Gemma 4 31B, Gemma 4 26B A4B, Gemma 4 E4B, Gemma 4 E2B. 12 of 726 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.

Its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #45, while its lowest eligible position is Knowledge at #137. particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.

Last updated October 20, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.

Deployment options

Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.

Published weights are available, but BenchLM does not yet have a sourced parameter and VRAM profile for this exact model. Hardware cost estimates stay unavailable until that sizing record is complete.

Estimate VRAM from known parameters

Questions

How does Gemma 4 12B perform overall in AI benchmarks?

Gemma 4 12B ranks #159 out of 227 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 36.1/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 12 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.

Is Gemma 4 12B good for knowledge and understanding?

Gemma 4 12B ranks #137 out of 187 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 35.4/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is Gemma 4 12B good for coding and programming?

Gemma 4 12B ranks #115 out of 152 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 22.7/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is Gemma 4 12B good for mathematics?

Gemma 4 12B has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Gemma 4 12B good for reasoning and logic?

Gemma 4 12B has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Gemma 4 12B good for multimodal and grounded tasks?

Gemma 4 12B ranks #45 out of 55 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 59.4/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is Gemma 4 12B open source?

Gemma 4 12B is an open-weight model from Google. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.

Which sibling models are related to Gemma 4 12B?

Gemma 4 12B belongs to the Gemma 4 family. Related tracked variants include Gemma 4 31B, Gemma 4 26B A4B, Gemma 4 E4B, plus 1 more. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.

Does Gemma 4 12B have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

No. Gemma 4 12B currently has 26 source-displayable rows. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.

What is the context window size of Gemma 4 12B?

Gemma 4 12B has a documented context window of 256K. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.

Watch Gemma 4 12B in the weekly brief

Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 5,600+ readers.

Compare Gemma 4 12B with every tracked model971 comparisons