Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GPT-5 Nano
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher in 8 categories and GPT-5 Nano in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads 58.6 to 39.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 29.7% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and 7.9% for GPT-5 Nano.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper at $0.0675 / $0.23 per million input/output tokens, against $0.05 / $0.40 for GPT-5 Nano.
- GPT-5 Nano accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 262K.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 43.5 | 33.5 |
| Released | 2026-04-02 | 2025-08-07 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 400K |
| Max output | 33K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.0675 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.23 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 28 | 49 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 39.0 (#164), GPT-5 Nano: 33.6 (#254)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 35.2% | 38.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1447 | 1351 |
| ALE-Bench | 927.17 | 718.67 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 34.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1359 | — |
| SciCode | 40% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —, GPT-5 Nano: 25.8 (#106)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 21.8% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 51.5% |
Reasoning Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213), GPT-5 Nano: 16.3 (#306)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 27% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1439 | 1328 |
| DTBench | 74.9% | 62.7% |
| LMCA | 29.7% | 7.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.85 | 139.38 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 2.6% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 62.2% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 20.7% |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.1 |
Math Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67), GPT-5 Nano: 29.4 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 82.2% | 81.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1470 | 1317 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 20% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 2.4% |
| ProofBench | — | 12% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 54.6% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 95.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 8.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85), GPT-5 Nano: 35.9 (#178)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 73.2% | 69.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.2% | 10.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1447 | 1321 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 11.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 77.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 67.9% |
Multimodal Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46), GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#108)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1260 | 1159 |
| VPCT | — | 37.2% |
Multilingual Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71), GPT-5 Nano: 45.3 (#172)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1421 | 1313 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1356 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1296 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1417 | 1360 |
| LMArena French | 1460 | — |
| LMArena German | — | 1327 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1226 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1269 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82), GPT-5 Nano: 75.0 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1306 |
| IFEval | — | 93.2% |
Long Context Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91), GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#281)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1312 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 44.4% |
Writing & Preference Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115), GPT-5 Nano: 39.1 (#249)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1434 | 1320 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1402 | 1249 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1305 | 705 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1311 |
| WildBench | — | 80.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better than GPT-5 Nano?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or GPT-5 Nano?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.0675 per million input tokens and $0.23 per million output tokens; GPT-5 Nano lists at $0.05 and $0.40.
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or GPT-5 Nano better for coding?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.0 versus 33.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5 Nano does, with 400K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and GPT-5 Nano share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5 Nano has 49.