Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Lyria 3.5
At a Glance
| Compare |  Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle DeepMind | Lyria 3.5Google DeepMind |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.070Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | Not reported |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.30Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | Not reported |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 262K | 1,049K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 22, 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
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | Lyria 3.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Google DeepMind |
| Family | Gemma 4 | Lyria |
| Model | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | Lyria 3.5 |
| Version | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | Lyria 3.5 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-03-11 | 2026-07-29 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text, Audio |
| Context window | 262K | 1,049K |
| 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) | Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | generation, image-to-music, lyrics, music-generation, synthid, vocals |
Gemma 4 26B A4B Capabilities
Lyria 3.5 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | 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-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Gemma 4 26B-A4BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
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 |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
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 |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Lyria 3.5 FAQs
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B or Lyria 3.5 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemma 4 26B A4B and Lyria 3.5, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Lyria 3.5?+
Only Gemma 4 26B A4B has a directly sourced input price: $0.070 per million tokens. Only Gemma 4 26B A4B has a directly sourced output price: $0.30 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Lyria 3.5?+
Lyria 3.5 has the larger sourced context window. Gemma 4 26B A4B supports 262K and Lyria 3.5 supports 1,049K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Lyria 3.5?+
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 Lyria 3.5 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; Lyria 3.5 is not marked open weight.
Can Gemma 4 26B A4B and Lyria 3.5 understand images?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B is documented with image input; Lyria 3.5 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Lyria 3.5?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemma 4 26B A4B is — and Lyria 3.5 is 66K.
Do Gemma 4 26B A4B and Lyria 3.5 support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Lyria 3.5: image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Lyria 3.5?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B has 4 sourced provider routes; Lyria 3.5 has 2, so Gemma 4 26B A4B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Lyria 3.5?+
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.