Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Llama 3.2 1B
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemma 4 26B A4B IT's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads 45.7 to 7.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 82.2% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and 0.6% for Llama 3.2 1B.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.09 / $0.30 for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 60K.
Side by side
| Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 43.5 | 20.1 |
| Released | 2026-04-02 | 2024-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | 60K |
| Max output | 33K | 54K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.09 | $0.027 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 28 | 22 |
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), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1447 | 1070 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1359 | — |
| SciCode | 40% | — |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 8.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 11.3% |
| ALE-Bench | 927.17 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10.8% |
| BALROG | — | 6.6% |
Reasoning Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213), Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1439 | 1044 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.85 | 101.99 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 74.9% | — |
| LMCA | 29.7% | — |
Math Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67), Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 82.2% | 0.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1470 | 1086 |
Knowledge Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85), Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 73.2% | 23.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1447 | 1007 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46), Llama 3.2 1B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1260 | — |
Multilingual Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71), Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1421 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 959 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 941 |
| LMArena French | 1460 | — |
| LMArena German | — | 1014 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1417 | — |
Instruction Following Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82), Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1031 |
Long Context Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91), Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1050 |
Writing & Preference Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1434 | 1055 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1402 | 1033 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1305 | 200 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1030 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better than Llama 3.2 1B?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemma 4 26B A4B IT's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Llama 3.2 1B?
Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Gemma 4 26B A4B IT lists at $0.09 and $0.30.
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.0 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT does, with 262K tokens against 60K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and Llama 3.2 1B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.