ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5 4B

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.5 4B 78, Gemma 4 E2B IT 76). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Google

    Gemma 4 E2B IT

    Released Apr 2, 2026

    76/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.04 / $0.08
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 4 E2B IT

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 4B

    Released Mar 2, 2026

    78/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.04 / $0.07
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 4B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3.5 4B 78/100, Gemma 4 E2B IT 76/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 4B on price and Qwen3.5 4B for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 4BQwen3.5 4B $0.048 · Gemma 4 E2B IT $0.05 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 4BQwen3.5 4B 262,144 · Gemma 4 E2B IT 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsGemma 4 E2B IT: Text, Images, Audio · Qwen3.5 4B: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemma 4 E2B ITQwen3.5 4B
Price50%100100
Inputs & features30%7070
Context window20%2537
Overall100%76/10078/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5 4B specifications side by side
SpecificationGemma 4 E2B ITGoogleQwen3.5 4BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—55.8%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.04$0.04
Output$0.08$0.07 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.05$0.048 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 3 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens81,920 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioYesNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache-2.0
API model ID——
API providers15 (best)
ReleasedApr 2, 2026Mar 2, 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 E2B IT$0.56
  • Qwen3.5 4B$0.54
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemma 4 E2B IT or Qwen3.5 4B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3.5 4B 78/100, Gemma 4 E2B IT 76/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 4B on price and Qwen3.5 4B for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 E2B IT or Qwen3.5 4B?

Qwen3.5 4B is cheaper at $0.04 input / $0.07 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Gemma 4 E2B IT costs $0.04 input / $0.08 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.048 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 4B versus $0.05 for Gemma 4 E2B IT (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Gemma 4 E2B IT has not been scored yet and Qwen3.5 4B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemma 4 E2B IT and Qwen3.5 4B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 4B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for Gemma 4 E2B IT. Maximum output per response: Gemma 4 E2B IT up to 8,192, Qwen3.5 4B up to 81,920 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemma 4 E2B IT accepts text, images and audio; Qwen3.5 4B accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Gemma 4 E2B IT is the newest, released Apr 2, 2026. Qwen3.5 4B came out Mar 2, 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