Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads 47.6 to 16.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 82.2% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 43.5 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2026-04-02 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | 131K |
| Max output | 33K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.09 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 28 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 39.0 (#164), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1359 | — |
| SciCode | 40% | — |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1447 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
| ALE-Bench | 927.17 | — |
Reasoning Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.85 | 128.52 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1439 | — |
| DTBench | 74.9% | — |
| LMCA | 29.7% | — |
Math Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 82.2% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1470 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 73.2% | 46.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.2% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1447 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1260 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1421 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | — |
| LMArena French | 1460 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1417 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1402 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1305 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (39.0 vs 38.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemma 4 26B A4B IT does, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.