# DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

> DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-pro-vs-gemma-4-26b-a4b-it
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 27

## Summary

- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Pro leads 56.5 to 21.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 47% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 6% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT.
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1.98 for DeepSeek V4 Pro.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Google |
| Noometry Index | 54.3 | 43.5 |
| Rank | 31 | 92 |
| Context | 1M | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.66 | $0.09 |
| Output $/M | $1.98 | $0.30 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 52.4 (#34)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 39.0 (#164)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1582 | 1359 |
| SciCode | 51% | 40% |
| WeirdML | 66.2% | 35.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1470 | 1447 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,403 | 927.17 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 77.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 28.6% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 32.8 (#58)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 47.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,285 | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 56.5 (#24)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 18% | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | 6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1439 |
| DTBench | 93.9% | 74.9% |
| LMCA | 45.5% | 29.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.31 | 141.85 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 40% | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.1 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 64.8 (#30)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.6% | 82.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1470 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 64.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 59.5 (#31)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | 73.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.6% | 5.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1464 | 1447 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.9% | — |

## Multimodal

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: —
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1260 |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 54.4 (#45)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 1421 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1486 | 1495 |
| LMArena French | 1472 | 1460 |
| LMArena Russian | 1453 | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | 1417 |
| LMArena German | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1445 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1447 | — |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 76.1 (#47)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1448 | 1420 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 45.0 (#51)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1458 | 1428 |
| CL-bench Life | 13.5% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 65.5 (#46)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1434 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1446 | 1402 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1553 | 1305 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | 1441 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1166 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemma 4 26B A4B IT?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemma 4 26B A4B IT?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V4 Pro lists at $0.66 and $1.98.

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better for coding?

DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.4 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4 Pro does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Pro has 48 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28.