Model Comparison
Gemma 3n E4B Instruct
vs. Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Google
Recommended Pick
Go Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) 13 metric wins Strongest on: Input price, Output price, TTFT
Lowest Price
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning)
24.8 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning)
6.4 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Gemma 3n E4B Instruct.
Reasoning gap
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) leads Gemma 3n E4B Instruct by 2.0 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) leads Gemma 3n E4B Instruct by 2.2 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) wins 13 measurable categories, including Input price, Output price, TTFT, Latency.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Gemma 3n E4B Instruct
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Go Gemma 3n E4B Instruct | Top Pick Go Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.02/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.04/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.03/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | ||
| Release Date | Jun 26, 2025 | Apr 3, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 43.5 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 413ms | — |
| Latency | 413ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 22.8 | 24.8 |
| Intelligence | 6.4 | 14.8 |
| Coding | 4.2 | 6.4 |
| Math | 14.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 29.6% | 54.9% |
| MMLU Pro | 48.8% | — |
| HLE | 4.4% | 4.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 14.6% | — |
| MATH 500 | 77.1% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 14.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 13.7% | — |
| SciCode | 8.1% | 3.9% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 18.0% |
| IFBench | 27.9% | 40.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 5.0% | 26.0% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 2.3% | 7.6% |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 24.8 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 6.4 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Gemma 3n E4B Instruct
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Gemma 4 E4B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
