Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Gemma 3 4B
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 3 4B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 36.4 to 11.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 7.5% for Gemma 3 4B.
- Gemma 3 4B is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 4B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ||
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 28.1 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2025-03-12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 66K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.04 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.08 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), Gemma 3 4B: 35.9 (#215)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | 1230 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), Gemma 3 4B: 20.9 (#142)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | 19.6% |
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), Gemma 3 4B: 13.2 (#335)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | 25.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1253 |
| DTBench | 76.5% | 50.9% |
| LMCA | 27.5% | 2.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | 116.02 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), Gemma 3 4B: 16.8 (#292)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | 7.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1415 | 1239 |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), Gemma 3 4B: 11.8 (#299)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | 6.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | 1223 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 23.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), Gemma 3 4B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), Gemma 3 4B: 42.5 (#194)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | 1273 |
| LMArena German | 1418 | 1281 |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | 1294 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | — |
| LMArena French | 1433 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), Gemma 3 4B: 65.2 (#225)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1239 |
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), Gemma 3 4B: 38.7 (#194)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1273 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), Gemma 3 4B: 42.0 (#239)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | 1291 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1271 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | 1068 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1255 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Gemma 3 4B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Gemma 3 4B?
Gemma 3 4B is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or Gemma 3 4B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (35.8 vs 35.9); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Gemma 3 4B share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3 4B has 22.