Data as of October 20, 2026 · How the score is built
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 | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticWeight 22%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| CodingRank #115 of 152Percentile 25thWeight 20%1 benchmarkVerified | 22.7 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified | 51.8 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| MultimodalRank #45 of 55Percentile 19thWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified | 59.4 | 4 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| KnowledgeRank #137 of 187Percentile 27thWeight 12%5 benchmarksVerified | 35.4 | 5 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 61.3 | 1 benchmark | Verified |
12 of 726 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow 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.
- AgenticNot measured
- Coding1/1 verified
- Reasoning1/1 verified
- Multimodal4/4 verified
- Knowledge5/5 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- Math1/1 verified
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
- AgenticNot ranked
- Coding#115/152
- ReasoningNot ranked
- Multimodal#45/55
- Knowledge#137/187
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
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
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench v6 | Score72.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.2% | Gap21.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Reasoning1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRCRv2 | Score43.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.6% | Gap50.2 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Provider exact |
Multimodal4 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro | Score69.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash · 83.6% | Gap14.5 behind | WeightWeighted 40% | Provider exact |
| 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 behind | WeightDisplay only | |
| MathVision | Score79.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 95.2% | Gap15.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MedXpertQA (MM)MedXpertQA Multimodal | Score48.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 80.4% | Gap31.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Knowledge5 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without tools | Score5.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 64.4% | Gap59.2 behind | Weight7% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding Professional | Score77.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6% | Gap12.4 behind | Weight6% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score78.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap17.2 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score78.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0% | Gap17.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MMMLU | Score83.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Interfaze Beta · 90.9% | Gap7.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Math1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26AIME 2026 | Score77.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 99.2% | Gap21.7 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value
All 12 rowsLineage
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
- Context window
- 256KGoogle Gemma 4 model documentation
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- text, image, audio, videoGoogle Gemma 4 model documentation
- Output modalities
- textGoogle Gemma 4 model documentation
- Parameters
- 12B total · DENSE
- Availability
- open weightsGoogle gemma-4-12B model card
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- activeGoogle gemma-4-12B model card
- 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 parametersQuestions
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.