Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Muse Spark 1.2
At a Glance
| Compare |  Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle DeepMind |  Muse Spark 1.2Meta |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | Not reported |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 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
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,434.4796% of row best · rating · gemma-4-26b-a4b; 95% CI [1426.87673667, 1442.06986887]; votes 5804; rank 80 | 1,489.44100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.2 (xHigh); 95% CI [1478.95697715, 1499.92080617]; votes 3227; rank 11 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,258.9097% of row best · rating · gemma-4-26b-a4b; 95% CI [1252.23205561, 1265.56747875]; votes 22658; rank 47 | 1,303.88100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.2 (xHigh); 95% CI [1289.13624882, 1318.62565115]; votes 1841; rank 14 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 2 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
| Field | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Meta |
| Family | Gemma 4 | Muse Spark |
| Model | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
| Version | Gemma 4 26B-A4B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
| Lifecycle | active | preview |
| Released | 2026-03-11 | 2026-08-05 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video, Audio |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | Unknown |
| 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) | Unknown |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, computer-use, generation, reasoning, research, structured_outputs, tools |
Gemma 4 26B A4B Capabilities
Muse Spark 1.2 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 Muse Spark 1.2 FAQs
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B or Muse Spark 1.2 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemma 4 26B A4B and Muse Spark 1.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Muse Spark 1.2?+
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 Muse Spark 1.2?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Gemma 4 26B A4B is 262K and Muse Spark 1.2 is —.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Muse Spark 1.2?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Gemma 4 26B A4B or Muse Spark 1.2 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; Muse Spark 1.2 is not marked open weight.
Can Gemma 4 26B A4B and Muse Spark 1.2 understand images?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B is documented with image input; Muse Spark 1.2 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Muse Spark 1.2?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemma 4 26B A4B is — and Muse Spark 1.2 is —.
Do Gemma 4 26B A4B and Muse Spark 1.2 support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Muse Spark 1.2: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Muse Spark 1.2?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B has 4 sourced provider routes; Muse Spark 1.2 has 0, so Gemma 4 26B A4B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Muse Spark 1.2?+
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.