Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Gemma 4 26B A4B

At a Glance

Compare
Gemini 3.5 Flash LiteGoogle DeepMind
Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle DeepMind
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#39 of 4617.6 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#8 of 44$0.029 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#32 of 3846.2 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.30Google AI · Aug 29, 2026$0.070Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$2.50Google AI · Aug 29, 2026$0.30Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,049K262K
Model facts checkedAug 29, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGemma 4 26B-A4B
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · statistical tie1,435.54100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-lite; 95% CI [1430.59505493, 1440.49024696]; votes 26165; rank 791,434.47100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-26b-a4b; 95% CI [1426.87673667, 1442.06986887]; votes 5804; rank 80
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · statistical tie1,268.42100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-lite; 95% CI [1258.88097193, 1277.96729164]; votes 5254; rank 371,258.9099% of row best · rating · gemma-4-26b-a4b; 95% CI [1252.23205561, 1265.56747875]; votes 22658; rank 47
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 2 ties0 benchmark winsNo overall winner0 benchmark winsNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGemma 4 26B-A4B
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindGoogle DeepMind
FamilyGemini 3Gemma 4
ModelGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGemma 4 26B-A4B
VersionGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGemma 4 26B-A4B
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2026-03-11
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, Image, Video, Audio, DocumentText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,049K262K
Total parametersUnknown26B
Active parametersUnknown4B
LicenseUnknownapache-2.0
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessGoogle AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-3.5-flash-lite

Gemma 4 26B A4B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers4
Canonical IDgoogle/gemma-4-26B-A4B-it

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Gemma 4 26B A4B FAQs

Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Gemma 4 26B A4B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is $0.30 and Gemma 4 26B A4B is $0.070 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper on this metric. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is $2.50 and Gemma 4 26B A4B is $0.30 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite supports 1,049K and Gemma 4 26B A4B supports 262K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: Neither model leads outside the score tolerance on the verified common benchmarks.

Can Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B be self-hosted?+

Gemma 4 26B A4B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is not marked open weight; Gemma 4 26B A4B is open weight.

Can Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Gemma 4 26B A4B understand images?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is documented with image input; Gemma 4 26B A4B is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is 66K and Gemma 4 26B A4B is —.

Do Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Gemma 4 26B A4B support reasoning and tool use?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Gemma 4 26B A4B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has 2 sourced provider routes; Gemma 4 26B A4B has 4, so Gemma 4 26B A4B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback