Model comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Sakana Fugu-Ultra
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported); Sakana Fugu-Ultra unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 26B A4B and Sakana Fugu-Ultra share 1 comparable benchmark result. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to Gemma 4 26B A4B; 10 to Sakana Fugu-Ultra.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Gemma 4 26B A4B only
- 19
- Sakana Fugu-Ultra only
- 10
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Gemma 4 26B A4B makes more sense if its workflow fits your team better; Sakana Fugu-Ultra is the better fit if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 2 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 Sakana Fugu-Ultra 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.
Sakana Fugu-Ultra gives you the larger context window at 1M, 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 | Sakana Fugu-Ultra |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 26B A4B43.4 | Margin→ 52.1 | Sakana Fugu-Ultra95.5 |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 26B A4B73.8 | Margin→ 12.8 | Sakana Fugu-Ultra86.6 |
| Agentic | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Sakana Fugu-Ultra82.1 |
| Coding | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Sakana Fugu-Ultra64.5 |
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Sakana Fugu-Ultra93.6 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Sakana Fugu-Ultra | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 output | Sakana Fugu-UltraNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | Sakana Fugu-UltraNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | Sakana Fugu-UltraNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 26B A4B256K | Sakana Fugu-Ultra1M | Sakana Fugu-Ultra lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Sakana Fugu-Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding IndexSource | 39.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 40.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 73.7% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | — | 93.2% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | — | 90.8% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 58.7% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeSakana Fugu-Ultra wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Sakana Fugu-Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 82.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 17.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 8.7% | 50% | Sakana Fugu-Ultra leads |
| 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 | — | 95.5% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 95.5% | Not comparable |
MultimodalSakana Fugu-Ultra wins3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Sakana Fugu-Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 72.4% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Sakana Fugu-Ultra?
Gemma 4 26B A4B and Sakana Fugu-Ultra 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 Sakana Fugu-Ultra?
Sakana Fugu-Ultra has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 95.5 versus 43.4. Inside this category, HLE w/o tools is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Sakana Fugu-Ultra?
Sakana Fugu-Ultra has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 86.6 versus 73.8. Gemma 4 26B A4B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.