Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GLM 5.3
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,434.8697% of row best · rating · gemma-4-26b-a4b; 95% CI [1427.26766156, 1442.45594559]; votes 5814; rank 78 | 1,474.49100% of row best · rating · glm-5.3-max; 95% CI [1467.12172899, 1481.86064533]; votes 7401; rank 18 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark wins | 1 benchmark winOverall lead |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Z.ai |
| Family | Gemma 4 | Glm 5 3 |
| Model | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | GLM-5.3 |
| Version | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | GLM-5.3 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-03-11 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | 26B | Unknown |
| Active parameters | 4B | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | Unknown |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | agents, chat, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
13 comparable fields · 10 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Gemma 4 26B A4B Capabilities
GLM 5.3 Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | vs | Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GLM 5.3 FAQs
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemma 4 26B A4B and GLM 5.3, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B is $0.070 and GLM 5.3 is $1.20 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper on this metric. Gemma 4 26B A4B is $0.34 and GLM 5.3 is $4.00 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3?+
GLM 5.3 has the larger sourced context window. Gemma 4 26B A4B supports 262K and GLM 5.3 supports 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3 be self-hosted?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemma 4 26B A4B is open weight; GLM 5.3 is not marked open weight.
Can Gemma 4 26B A4B and GLM 5.3 understand images?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B is documented with image input; GLM 5.3 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemma 4 26B A4B is — and GLM 5.3 is 131K.
Do Gemma 4 26B A4B and GLM 5.3 support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5.3: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B has 4 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 has 4, a tie.
Which offers better value, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GLM 5.3?+
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.