Model Comparison
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Google, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Go Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) 8 metric wins Strongest on: Input price, Output price, TTFT
Lowest Price
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct
22.9 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
8.3 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 E2B (Non-reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct leads Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) by 3.9 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct by 1.0 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) wins 8 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 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Go Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.18/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.70/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.31/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | |
| Release Date | Apr 2, 2026 | Oct 14, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 147.5 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 928ms |
| Latency | — | 928ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 19.0 | 22.9 |
| Intelligence | 12.1 | 14.3 |
| Coding | 8.3 | 7.3 |
| Math | — | 27.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 40.5% | 42.7% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 68.6% |
| HLE | 4.5% | 2.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 33.2% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 27.3% |
| SciCode | 20.4% | 17.4% |
| LCR | 15.0% | 15.3% |
| IFBench | 33.6% | 32.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 22.2% | 29.2% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 2.3% | 2.3% |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct has the strongest reasoning profile with a 22.9 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 8.3 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 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
