ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniMax-M3 vs Qwen3.5 Flash

Qwen3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 73 to 68 and 68 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Google

    Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

    Released Apr 2, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI142.0
    • Price$0.112 / $0.40
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

  2. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M3

    Released Jun 1, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI146.9
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove MiniMax-M3
  3. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 Flash

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    73/100
    • ECI143.6
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 Flash
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 Flash is our pick

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against MiniMax-M3 (68) and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT (68). It leads on inputs & features. MiniMax-M3 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityMiniMax-M3Capabilities Index (ECI): MiniMax-M3 146.9 · Qwen3.5 Flash 143.6 · Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 142.0
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash $0.175 · Gemma 4 26B A4B IT $0.184 · MiniMax-M3 $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextMiniMax-M3MiniMax-M3 1,048,576 · Qwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 · Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsMiniMax-M3 and Qwen3.5 FlashGemma 4 26B A4B IT: Text, Images · MiniMax-M3: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingGemma 4 26B A4B IT and MiniMax-M3Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemma 4 26B A4B ITMiniMax-M3Qwen3.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%677369
Price25%816082
Inputs & features15%707080
Context window10%376160
Overall100%68/10068/10073/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniMax-M3 vs Qwen3.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationGemma 4 26B A4B ITGoogleMiniMax-M3MiniMaxQwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)142.0146.9 (best)143.6
ECI rank#103 of 165#72 of 165 (best)#95 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions73.2%90.9% (best)82.3%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics——18.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics82.2%71.1%84.4% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions——20.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.112$0.30$0.10 (best)
Output$0.40 (best)$1.20$0.40 (best)
Cached input—$0.06$0.01 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.184$0.525$0.175 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateOver 512K: $0.60 / $2.40Same rate
Price sourceMedian of 26 providersOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)1,000,000 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens512,000 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenProprietary
API model IDgemma-4-26b-a4b-itMiniMax-M3qwen3.5-flash
API providers2950 (best)9
ReleasedApr 2, 2026Jun 1, 2026Feb 23, 2026
Knowledge cutoff———
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemma 4 26B A4B IT$1.92
  • MiniMax-M3$5.40
  • Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemma 4 26B A4B IT, MiniMax-M3 or Qwen3.5 Flash?

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against MiniMax-M3 (68) and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT (68). It leads on inputs & features. MiniMax-M3 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT, MiniMax-M3 or Qwen3.5 Flash?

Qwen3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs $0.112 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (median across 26 API providers); MiniMax-M3 costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.175 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 Flash versus $0.184 for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT (1× as much) and $0.525 for MiniMax-M3 (3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

MiniMax-M3 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): MiniMax-M3 146.9 (#72 of 165), Qwen3.5 Flash 143.6 (#95 of 165) and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 142.0 (#103 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (142.4–150.3 vs 141.4–145.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — MiniMax-M3 90.9%, Qwen3.5 Flash 82.3%, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 73.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.5 Flash 84.4%, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 82.2%, MiniMax-M3 71.1%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT, MiniMax-M3 and Qwen3.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, MiniMax-M3 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M3 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen3.5 Flash and 262,144 for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT. Maximum output per response: Gemma 4 26B A4B IT up to 32,768, MiniMax-M3 up to 512,000, Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT accepts text and images; MiniMax-M3 accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video. MiniMax-M3 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT and MiniMax-M3 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

MiniMax-M3 is the newest, released Jun 1, 2026. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT came out Apr 2, 2026; Qwen3.5 Flash came out Feb 23, 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons