Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

Google: Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-27B

Gemma 4 26B A4B (medium) leads on average score with 6.6 vs 6.5. Qwen3.5-27B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.058 vs $0.082. Qwen3.5-27B is faster at 4.76s vs 103.83s, with pass rates of 66.7% vs 40.9%.

Recommended modelQwen3.5-27BIts score stays close to the best score here (6.5 vs 6.6), while responding about 21.8x faster than Gemma 4 26B A4B (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-17

Metric Gemma 4 26B A4B Gemma 4 26B A4B medium Release: 2026-04-03 Free Available Qwen3.5-27B Qwen3.5-27B none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.6 6.5
Rank #91 #98
Reliability 9.4 10.0
Consistency 9.2 9.3
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 66.7% 40.9%
Flaky tests 2 2
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.643 0.763
Total Cost $0.082 $0.058
Input Price $0.100 / 1M $0.195 / 1M
Output Price $0.300 / 1M $1.560 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 77,550 102,316
Output Tokens 28,036 24,321
Reasoning Tokens 219,491 0
Response Time (avg) 103.83s 4.76s
Response Time (max) 912.19s 69.46s
Response Time (total) 2180.47s 104.71s

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#91 Gemma 4 26B A4B

medium
Invalid SVG
Cost
$0.000
Time
300.0s
Tokens
0 tok

#98 Qwen3.5-27B

none
Cost
$0.007
Time
42.9s
Tokens
4,273 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Gemma 4 26B A4B 2.9 10.0 0.0% 0 272.54s 5,062 14,838 44,567
Qwen3.5-27B 5.8 10.0 33.3% 0 1.80s 7,913 415 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair