Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GPT-5.2
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported); GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 26B A4B and GPT-5.2 share 12 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to Gemma 4 26B A4B; 16 to GPT-5.2.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Gemma 4 26B A4B only
- 8
- GPT-5.2 only
- 16
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 26B A4B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.2 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 58.43 versus 57.96. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
GPT-5.2's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 92.4 against 43.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MMMU-Pro, 73.8% to 79.5%.
GPT-5.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 26B A4B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Δ | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 26B A4B43.4 | Margin→ 49.0 | GPT-5.292.4 |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 26B A4B73.8 | Margin→ 6.6 | GPT-5.280.4 |
| Agentic | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.255.7 |
| Coding | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.270.6 |
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.252.9 |
| Math | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.235.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 73.8%B 79.5%Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 5.7MMMU-Pro: Gemma 4 26B A4B scored 73.8%; GPT-5.2 scored 79.5%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 26B A4B | GPT-5.2 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 output | GPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | GPT-5.273 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | GPT-5.2130.34 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 26B A4B256K | GPT-5.2400K | GPT-5.2 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 11.0% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 43.6% | 84.8% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 13.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 761 | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 65.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 47.3% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 46.54% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 34.3% | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 82.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 17.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 8.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.7% | 42.2% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 79.2% | 90.3% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 18.3% | 35.4% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -48.1% | -1.0% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 18.2% | 43.8% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.9% | 79.7% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| GPQASource | — | 92.4% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
MultimodalGPT-5.2 wins6 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 72.4% | 75.4% | GPT-5.2 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.43 to 57.96. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMMU-Pro, where the scores are 73.8% and 79.5%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 43.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 73.8. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.