Skip to content
VECTOR WIREAI INTELLIGENCE
⌘K
UTC
Models741Deals30d271Policy30d65, 13 pendingSources1,015

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B

Google · released

Wins 0 of 8 areas

—

Alibaba · released

Wins 7 of 8 areas

Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Math · Long documents

Qwen3.5 35B A3B is the stronger all-rounder.Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper.

Scores updated · 80 tests both models report · How we compare

Where each one wins

Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.

Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.

What it costs

Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.

Gemma 4 26B A4B$0.13 to read · $0.40 to write$0.53Price from Artificial Analysis
Qwen3.5 35B A3B$0.25 to read · $2.00 to write$2.25Price from Alibaba's own price page

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 76% less for the same work.

The biggest differences

The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.

Where Qwen3.5 35B A3B pulls ahead

  • Fixes real GitHub issues in Python projectsSWE-bench Verified+51.8points aheadQwen3.5 35B A3B69.2Gemma 4 26B A4B17.4
  • Fixes real GitHub issues in many programming languagesSWE-bench Multilingual+43points aheadQwen3.5 35B A3B60.3Gemma 4 26B A4B17.3
  • Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+34.7points aheadQwen3.5 35B A3B61Gemma 4 26B A4B26.3

Where Gemma 4 26B A4B pulls ahead

  • Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+7.1points aheadGemma 4 26B A4B12Qwen3.5 35B A3B4.9
  • Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+2.5points aheadGemma 4 26B A4B77.1Qwen3.5 35B A3B74.6
  • Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+2.3points aheadGemma 4 26B A4B40Qwen3.5 35B A3B37.7

Every test, side by side

All 80 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.

CodingQwen3.5 35B A3B

Full coding ranking

AgentsQwen3.5 35B A3B

Full agents ranking

ReasoningQwen3.5 35B A3B

Full reasoning ranking

FactsQwen3.5 35B A3B

Full facts ranking

Images and chartsQwen3.5 35B A3B

Full images and charts ranking

MathQwen3.5 35B A3B

Full math ranking

Long documentsQwen3.5 35B A3B
  • AA-LCRQwen3.5 35B A3B by 6.365.772+6.3

Full long documents ranking

Following instructionsEven

Full following instructions ranking

Other results52 tests, not counted

Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.

Questions people ask

Which is better, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3.5 35B A3B?

Qwen3.5 35B A3B wins seven of the eight areas we test: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts, math and long documents. Gemma 4 26B A4B wins none, but costs 76% less. They are level on following instructions.

Which is better for coding?

Qwen3.5 35B A3B. It wins 5 of the 8 coding tests both models report; Gemma 4 26B A4B wins 3.

Which is cheaper?

Gemma 4 26B A4B costs $0.13 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 35B A3B costs $0.25 and $2.00. That makes Gemma 4 26B A4B about 76% cheaper for the same work.

How do you compare the two?

We use the 80 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 28 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 52 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.

Compare Gemma 4 26B A4B with

Google

Across the field

Compare Qwen3.5 35B A3B with

Alibaba

Across the field

All comparisons