Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs LFM2.5-230M

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

57.96/100
No comparison
LiquidAI
N/A
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported); LFM2.5-230M unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemma 4 26B A4B and LFM2.5-230M share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to Gemma 4 26B A4B; 5 to LFM2.5-230M.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
1
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
19
LFM2.5-230M only
5
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Gemma 4 26B A4B makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window; LFM2.5-230M is the better fit if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Gemma 4 26B A4B and LFM2.5-230M finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Gemma 4 26B A4B is the reasoning model in the pair, while LFM2.5-230M is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemma 4 26B A4B gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 32K for LFM2.5-230M.

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 scores and score margins for Gemma 4 26B A4B and LFM2.5-230M
CategoryGemma 4 26B A4BΔLFM2.5-230M
KnowledgeGemma 4 26B A4B43.4Margin 22.2LFM2.5-230M21.2
MultimodalGemma 4 26B A4B73.8MarginNo overlapLFM2.5-230MNot measured
Inst. FollowingGemma 4 26B A4BNot measuredMarginNo overlapLFM2.5-230M50.1

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemma 4 26B A4BB · LFM2.5-230M
  1. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 82.6%B 20.3%
    Winner: Gemma 4 26B A4BΔ 62.4
    MMLU-Pro: Gemma 4 26B A4B scored 82.6%; LFM2.5-230M scored 20.3%. Gemma 4 26B A4B wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGemma 4 26B A4BLFM2.5-230MComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 outputLFM2.5-230M$0 input / $0 outputListed prices are equal.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableLFM2.5-230MNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableLFM2.5-230MNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemma 4 26B A4B256KLFM2.5-230M32KGemma 4 26B A4B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BLFM2.5-230MResult
AA Agentic IndexSource 11.0%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 43.6%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 13.1%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 761Not comparable
BFCL v4Source 21.0%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BLFM2.5-230MResult
AA Coding IndexSource 39.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 40.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BLFM2.5-230MResult
AA-LCRSource 55.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
KnowledgeGemma 4 26B A4B wins
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BLFM2.5-230MResult
MMLU-ProSource 82.6%20.3%Gemma 4 26B A4B leads
HLESource 17.2%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 8.7%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.7%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 79.2%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 18.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -48.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 18.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.9%Not comparable
GPQASource 25.4%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 25.4%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BLFM2.5-230MResult
MMMU-ProSource 73.8%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 69.2%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BLFM2.5-230MResult
AA-IFBenchSource 72.4%Not comparable
IFEvalSource 71.7%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 38.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Gemma 4 26B A4B or LFM2.5-230M?

Gemma 4 26B A4B and LFM2.5-230M are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or LFM2.5-230M?

Gemma 4 26B A4B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 43.4 versus 21.2. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.