Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Data as of November 13, 2026 · How the score is built

Gemma 4 26B A4B

EstablishedOpen WeightReasoning

Decision readingGemma 4 26B A4B scores 41.2 out of 100 and ranks #132 of 215. This profile shows 13 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #37. Published weights can be self-hosted, but infrastructure cost varies and is not a comparable API token rate.

Email me when its price, rank or availability changes.

Capability

41.2/100

field median 49.4#132 of 215 ranked models

Public

#132of 215

Verified —

Price

Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies

input median $0.60No comparable first-party hosted token rate

Speed

Not measured

field median 92 tok/sTime to first token not measured

Context

256Ktokens

field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately

Decision snapshot

Where this model sits in the ranked field, its strongest published evidence, and what to validate before choosing it. The marker compares it with the current ranked catalog, not with an absolute quality threshold.

Strongest published evidence

Instruction Following ranks #37. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.

Validate before choosing

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

Source-linked · 13 displayable benchmark rows

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B right for your job?

Its place on the LLM Selector’s job rankings, the same order the job pages publish. Describe your own job to see where it stands for that.

Where Gemma 4 26B A4B ranks by benchmark score:

Describe the task and constraints. This selector recommends models; it cannot carry out the task or access your files and accounts.

We keep what you type here, drafts included, for 180 days, and after that only the job and requirements read from it. Nothing is tied to your IP address or account. Leave out names and other personal details. Privacy

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 #103 of 162Percentile 37thWeight 20%2 benchmarksVerified
30.6
ReasoningRank #102 of 160Percentile 36thWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified
35.0
MultimodalRank #56 of 67Percentile 17thWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified
48.6
KnowledgeRank #116 of 180Percentile 36thWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified
41.4
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
Inst. FollowingRank #37 of 157Percentile 77thWeight 5%Not listedUnlisted sources
88.7
MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured

13 of 919 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. Coding2/2 verified
  3. Reasoning1/1 verified
  4. Multimodal3/3 verified
  5. Knowledge4/4 verified
  6. MultilingualNot measured
  7. Inst. FollowingNot measured
  8. MathNot measured
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 26B A4B category percentile values

  • AgenticNot eligible
  • Coding37th percentile
  • Reasoning36th percentile
  • Multimodal17th percentile
  • Knowledge36th percentile
  • MultilingualNot eligible
  • Instruction following77th percentile
  • MathNot eligible

The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.

Eligible category ranks

  1. AgenticNot ranked
  2. Coding#103/162
  3. Reasoning#102/160
  4. Multimodal#56/67
  5. Knowledge#116/180
  6. MultilingualNot ranked
  7. Inst. Following#37/157
  8. MathNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible

Benchmark ledger

Every result says who ran the test. For this model, Google ran 7 of 13. Coding opens by default. The tick marks the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference.

Overall rank
#132
of 215 on the leaderboard
Reported by Google
7
Shown with that label
Run by a benchmark
6
The benchmark’s own run
Independent runs
0
None yet
Coding2 rows
Coding benchmark results, best verified comparison, who ran each test, and whether it counts toward a rank
ScarfBenchScarfBench: Cross-Framework Application Migration in Enterprise Java24.4%

Best verified: Gemini 4 Argon · 75.2%

Gap50.8 behindRun by ScarfBenchShown only
LiveCodeBench v677.1%

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.2%

Gap16.1 behindReported by GoogleShown only
Reasoning1 row
Reasoning benchmark results, best verified comparison, who ran each test, and whether it counts toward a rank
MRCRv244.1%

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.6%

Gap49.5 behindReported by GoogleCounts20% ref. weight
Multimodal3 rows
Multimodal benchmark results, best verified comparison, who ran each test, and whether it counts toward a rank
MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro73.8%

Best verified: GPT-6.1 Terra · 85.5%

Gap11.7 behindReported by GoogleCounts30% ref. weight
ParseBench-1ParseBench-1: document parsing for AI agents (LlamaIndex leaderboard, first release)58.50%

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 78.80%

Gap20.3 behindRun by ParseBench-1Counts7% ref. weight
ExtractBench (LlamaIndex)ExtractBench: schema-guided enterprise document extraction (LlamaIndex leaderboard)70.27%

Best verified: GPT-6.1 Sol · 95.31%

Gap25 behindRun by ExtractBench (LlamaIndex)Shown only
Knowledge4 rows
Knowledge benchmark results, best verified comparison, who ran each test, and whether it counts toward a rank
HLEHumanity's Last Exam17.2%

Best verified: Claude Fable 5.2 · 74.2%

Gap57 behindReported by GoogleCounts44% ref. weight
HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without tools8.7%

Best verified: Claude Fable 5.2 · 73.2%

Gap64.5 behindReported by GoogleCounts7% ref. weight
MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding Professional82.6%

Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6%

Gap7 behindReported by GoogleCounts6% ref. weight
GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A82.3%

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96%

Gap13.7 behindReported by GoogleCounts3% ref. weight
External signals3 rows
External signals benchmark results, best verified comparison, who ran each test, and whether it counts toward a rank
Chart Arena1322

Best verified: GPT-6.1 Sol · 1627

Gap305 behindRun by Chart ArenaShown only
FACTS Multimodal39.5%

Best verified: Gemini 4 Carbon · 60.2%

Gap20.7 behindRun by FACTS MultimodalShown only
StealthMarkStealthMark Intelligence Benchmarks (overall score)21.2

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 74.6

Gap53.4 behindRun by StealthMarkShown only

Outlined bars are lab-reported. Filled bars are benchmark-run or independent.

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.

API model ID
gemma-4-26b-a4b-itGoogle Gemma Gemini API guide
Maximum output
Not sourced yet
Knowledge cutoff
Not sourced yet
Input modalities
text, imageGoogle Gemma 4 model documentation
Parameters
Not sourced yet
Availability
Gemini API · Google AI Studio · open weightsGoogle Gemma Gemini API guide
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
Gemma 4 26B A4B needs ~24GB VRAM (1× NVIDIA RTX 4090 (24GB)).
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 26B A4B ranks #132 of 215 on the public leaderboard with a score of 41.23/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.

Gemma 4 26B A4B 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 April 2, 2026 Gemma 4 model card and launch post. BenchLM maps only schema-equivalent results from the published table: MMLU Pro, GPQA Diamond, LiveCodeBench v6, HLE no tools / with search, MMMU Pro, and MRCR v2. AIME 2026, Codeforces, MMMLU, OmniDocBench 1.5, MATH-Vision, MedXPertQA MM, audio benchmarks, BigBench Extra Hard (no matching key), and Tau2 (average over 3) remain out-of-schema or non-equivalent to current weighted keys.

Gemma 4 26B A4B sits in the Gemma 4 family with Gemma 4 31B, Gemma 4 12B, Gemma 4 E4B, Gemma 4 E2B. 13 of 919 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.

Its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #37, while its lowest eligible position is Knowledge at #116. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.

Last updated November 13, 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.

Where to run Gemma 4 26B A4B by API

3 hosts publish a per-token price for it. OpenRouter has the lowest output rate, $0.10 per million tokens. Prices read from each host’s own pages on November 11, 2026.

Inference hosts for Gemma 4 26B A4B with input, output and cached-input prices per million tokens.
HostInput /1MOutput /1MCached /1MContext
OpenRouter$0.08$0.10$0.046262K
DeepInfraServes gemma-4-26B-A4B-it$0.07$0.34—262K
Novita AI$0.13$0.40—262K
Compare inference hosts

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

Gemma 4 26B A4B
API / mo (Novita AI)$398
Self-host / mo$298
Break-even37M/day
Model the full break-even

Questions

How does Gemma 4 26B A4B perform overall in AI benchmarks?

Gemma 4 26B A4B ranks #132 out of 215 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 41.23/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 13 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B good for knowledge and understanding?

Gemma 4 26B A4B ranks #116 out of 180 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 41.4/100. 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 26B A4B good for coding and programming?

Gemma 4 26B A4B ranks #103 out of 162 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 30.6/100. 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 26B A4B good for reasoning and logic?

Gemma 4 26B A4B ranks #102 out of 160 eligible models for reasoning and logic, with a public category score of 35/100. 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 26B A4B good for multimodal and grounded tasks?

Gemma 4 26B A4B ranks #56 out of 67 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 48.6/100. 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 26B A4B open source?

Gemma 4 26B A4B 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 26B A4B?

Gemma 4 26B A4B belongs to the Gemma 4 family. Related tracked variants include Gemma 4 31B, Gemma 4 12B, 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 26B A4B have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

No. Gemma 4 26B A4B currently has 24 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 26B A4B?

Gemma 4 26B A4B 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.

Compare Gemma 4 26B A4B with every tracked model1032 comparisons