Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Grok 4.6
Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.6 in 9 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.3 to 21.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 6% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and 40% for Grok 4.6.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper at $0.0765 / $0.26 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.6.
- Grok 4.6 accepts more context: 500K 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 | Grok 4.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 56.8 |
| Released | 2026-04-02 | 2026-08-12 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 500K |
| Max output | 33K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.0765 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.26 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 28 | 49 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.6 leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 38.8 (#156), Grok 4.6: 58.0 (#14)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1359 | 1620 |
| SciCode | 40% | 56.5% |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | 67.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1446 | 1464 |
| ALE-Bench | 927.17 | 1,508 |
| DeepSWE | — | 67.5% |
| FrontierCode | — | 48% |
| CursorBench | — | 41.4% |
| FrontierSWE | — | 25.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —, Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#25)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 65.3% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 17.2% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 9,047 |
Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.1 (#205), Grok 4.6: 61.3 (#18)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 19.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 40% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1438 | 1445 |
| DTBench | 74.9% | 97.3% |
| LMCA | 29.7% | 48.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.85 | 156.48 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 67.1% |
| SimpleBench | — | 75.9% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 80% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.5% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 30.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 34% |
Math Grok 4.6 leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#61), Grok 4.6: 66.8 (#19)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 82.2% | 99.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1469 | 1416 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 66% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 31.7% |
| ProofBench | — | 51% |
Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.6 (#79), Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#18)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 73.2% | 94% |
| LMArena Expert | 1447 | 1463 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 49.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.2% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.6 leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 39.9 (#43), Grok 4.6: 43.9 (#18)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1260 | 1265 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 33.2% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 40% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.3 (#68), Grok 4.6: 53.3 (#67)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1422 | 1422 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1479 |
| LMArena French | 1459 | 1458 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1427 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1415 | 1408 |
| LMArena German | — | 1425 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1383 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1395 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 75.0 (#78), Grok 4.6: 75.6 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1431 |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#87), Grok 4.6: 44.4 (#62)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1427 | 1453 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.8 (#110), Grok 4.6: 62.5 (#77)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1434 | 1427 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1430 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1442 | 1422 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1305 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better than Grok 4.6?
Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Grok 4.6?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.0765 per million input tokens and $0.26 per million output tokens; Grok 4.6 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Grok 4.6 better for coding?
Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 38.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.6 does, with 500K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and Grok 4.6 share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.6 has 49.