Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.5 9B: Release Comparison
Comparison of the Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.5 9B releases: 2 and 2 models respectively, each with different intelligence, performance, and pricing characteristics. Below is a comparison of the key metrics across all 4 models.
- For intelligence, Gemma 4 26B A4B scores highest: Gemma 4 26B A4B (Reasoning) at 17, against Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) at 14 for Qwen3.5 9B.
- For output speed, Qwen3.5 9B is fastest: Qwen3.5 9B (Non-reasoning) at 88 t/s, against Gemma 4 26B A4B (Non-reasoning) at 72 t/s for Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Releases compared
Intelligence
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
Intelligence Index vs. Cost per Intelligence Index Task
Cost per Task (USD, Log Scale)
Cost
Cost per Intelligence Index Task
Speed & Latency
Output Speed
Capability Scores
Capability Indexes
Incorporates 7 evaluations: AA-Omniscience, GDPval-AA v2.1, AA-Briefcase v1.1, Humanity's Last Exam, AutomationBench-AA, AA-LCR v1.1, GDP.pdf · Higher is better
Incorporates 6 evaluations: AA-Omniscience, GDPval-AA v2.1, AA-Briefcase v1.1, AutomationBench-AA, AA-LCR v1.1, GDP.pdf · Higher is better
Incorporates 7 evaluations: AA-Omniscience, GDPval-AA v2.1, AA-Briefcase v1.1, Humanity's Last Exam, AA-LCR v1.1, GDP.pdf, AutomationBench-AA · Higher is better
Incorporates 6 evaluations: AA-Omniscience, GDPval-AA v2.1, AA-Briefcase v1.1, MLCR-AA, Humanity's Last Exam, AutomationBench-AA · Higher is better
Incorporates 6 evaluations: AA-Omniscience, Humanity's Last Exam, CritPt, GDPval-AA v2.1, AA-Briefcase v1.1, Terminal-Bench 4.0 · Higher is better
Incorporates 5 evaluations: AA-Omniscience, Humanity's Last Exam, GDPval-AA v2.1, AA-Briefcase v1.1, AA-LCR v1.1 · Higher is better
Further details
Input modality | Output modality | Weights | Provider Benchmarks | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gemma 4 26B A4B (Reasoning) |  Google | 17 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | $0.1 | $0.115 | $0.37 | $0.085 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 25.2B 3.8B active at inference time | 256k | Apr 2026 | - | Yes | Supports: text, image, and video | Supports: text |   +4 | |||
| Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) |  Alibaba | 14 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | $0.1 | $0.135 | $0.20 | - | - | - | - | - | 58 | 1.92s | 36.43s | 45.06s | - | 9.7B | 262k | Mar 2026 | - | Yes | Supports: text, image, and video | Supports: text |   | |||
| Qwen3.5 9B (Non-reasoning) | Alibaba | 13 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | $0.2 | $0.17 | $0.25 | - | - | - | - | - | 88 | 0.79s | 0.79s | 6.47s | - | 9.7B | 262k | Mar 2026 | - | No | Supports: text, image, and video | Supports: text | | |||
| Gemma 4 26B A4B (Non-reasoning) | Google | 13 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | $0.2 | $0.13 | $0.40 | $0.125 | - | - | - | - | 72 | 1.29s | 1.29s | 8.20s | - | 25.2B 3.8B active at inference time | 256k | Apr 2026 | - | No | Supports: text, image, and video | Supports: text |   +4 | |||