Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.5-9B

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT Google

43.5

Rank #92 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-9B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.8

Rank #236 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.5-9B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads 47.6 to 34.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 82.2% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and 61.7% for Qwen3.5-9B.
  • Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.09 / $0.30 for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT.

Side by side

Gemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.533.8
Released2026-04-022026-02-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K262K
Max output33K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.09$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$0.30$0.15
Results tracked2810

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), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217)

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
SciCode40%27.5%
LMArena WebDev1359—
WeirdML35.2%—
LMArena Coding1447—
ALE-Bench927.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —, Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151)

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
Terminal-Bench—9.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.5-9B leads

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213), Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182)

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
CritPt0%0.3%
Chess Puzzles6%12%
DTBench74.9%71.2%
LMCA29.7%24.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index141.85139.46
LMArena Hard Prompts1439—

Math Gemma 4 26B A4B IT leads

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67), Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192)

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202582.2%61.7%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—48.5%
LMArena Math1470—

Knowledge Too close to call

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85), Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84)

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
GPQA Diamond73.2%79%
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.2%—
LMArena Expert1447—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46), Qwen3.5-9B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Vision1260—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71), Qwen3.5-9B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Non-English1421—
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1460—
LMArena Russian1434—
LMArena Spanish1417—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82), Qwen3.5-9B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Instruction Following1420—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91), Qwen3.5-9B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Longer Query1428—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115), Qwen3.5-9B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Text1434—
LMArena Creative Writing1402—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1305—
LMArena Multi-Turn1441—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better than Qwen3.5-9B?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Gemma 4 26B A4B IT lists at $0.09 and $0.30.

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B IT or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.0 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and Qwen3.5-9B share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper