ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Qwen3.7 Flash comes out ahead, 79 to 75 and 70 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Google

    Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

    Released Apr 2, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI141.9
    • Price$0.10 / $0.38
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 Flash

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    75/100
    • ECI144.0
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 Flash
  3. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Flash

    Released Jul 15, 2026

    79/100
    • ECI144.6
    • Price$0.03 / $0.13
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Flash
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.7 Flash is our pick

Qwen3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Qwen3.5 Flash (75) and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT (70). It leads on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.7 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Flash 144.6 · Qwen3.5 Flash 144.0 · Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 141.9
  • Lowest priceQwen3.7 FlashQwen3.7 Flash $0.055 · Gemma 4 26B A4B IT $0.17 · Qwen3.5 Flash $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.7 FlashQwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3.7 Flash 1,000,000 · Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.7 FlashGemma 4 26B A4B IT: Text, Images · Qwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.7 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingGemma 4 26B A4B ITPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemma 4 26B A4B ITQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.7 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%687171
Price25%8686100
Inputs & features15%708080
Context window10%376060
Overall100%70/10075/10079/100
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 Qwen3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.7 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationGemma 4 26B A4B ITGoogleQwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.7 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)141.9144.0144.6 (best)
ECI rank#93 of 148#82 of 148#80 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions73.2%82.3% (best)82.3% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—18.3%19.3% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics82.2%84.4%86.7% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—20.3%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10$0.10$0.03 (best)
Output$0.38$0.40$0.13 (best)
Cached input—$0.01$0.003 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.17$0.175$0.055 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateOver 32K: $0.10 / $0.40
Price sourceMedian of 23 providersOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens65,536 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryProprietary
API model IDgemma-4-26b-a4b-itqwen3.5-flashqwen3.7-flash
API providers26 (best)812
ReleasedApr 2, 2026Feb 23, 2026Jul 15, 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$1.76
  • Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
  • Qwen3.7 Flash$0.56
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemma 4 26B A4B IT, Qwen3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Qwen3.5 Flash (75) and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT (70). It leads on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT, Qwen3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.13 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs $0.10 input / $0.38 output per million tokens (median across 23 API providers); Qwen3.5 Flash costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.055 per million tokens for Qwen3.7 Flash versus $0.17 for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT (3.1× as much) and $0.175 for Qwen3.5 Flash (3.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.7 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Flash 144.6 (#80 of 148), Qwen3.5 Flash 144.0 (#82 of 148) and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 141.9 (#93 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (142.4–147.6 vs 141.6–145.5), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 Flash 82.3%, Qwen3.7 Flash 82.3%, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 73.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.7 Flash 86.7%, Qwen3.5 Flash 84.4%, Gemma 4 26B A4B IT 82.2%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT, Qwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.7 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.7 Flash 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?

Qwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.7 Flash have the largest context windows (1,000,000 and 1,000,000 tokens), against 262,144 for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT. Maximum output per response: Gemma 4 26B A4B IT up to 32,768, Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536, Qwen3.7 Flash up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT accepts text and images; Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.7 Flash accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.7 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.7 Flash is the newest, released Jul 15, 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons