Roboflow

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B

Compare Claude Sonnet 4 and Gemma 4 26B A4B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Object Detection, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4

Claude Sonnet 4 is deprecated and can no longer be run. Details and evals are still available on its model page.

GoogleGemma 4 26B A4B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B: Overview

Claude Sonnet 4

Claude 4 Sonnet, released by Anthropic in May 2025, is the mid-tier model in the Claude 4 family, designed to balance capability, cost, and speed. It is multimodal, accepting both text and images, and extends beyond prior versions with improved “computer use” support, allowing API-driven interaction with desktop-like interfaces. By default, it supports 200,000 tokens of context, but as of August 2025, it also offers a 1 million-token context window in public beta—making it one of the most context-capable models available for processing entire codebases or large document sets in a single request.

Sonnet 4 is significantly cheaper than the flagship Opus while still demonstrating strong reasoning, coding, and instruction-following ability with reduced hallucinations. Its extended context capabilities and lower latency make it well-suited for enterprise-scale knowledge management, software development, research assistants, and productivity automation where both cost efficiency and high reliability are essential.

Gemma 4 26B A4B

Gemma 4 26B A4B is the Mixture-of-Experts variant in Google's Gemma 4 family, with 25.2B total parameters but only 3.8B active per token. Built from the same Gemini 3 research as the 31B dense sibling and released as open weights under the Apache 2.0 license, it supports a 256K token context window with text and image input and configurable thinking mode. The "A4B" in the name refers to its approximately 4B active parameters. The MoE design makes it significantly faster at inference than the dense 31B, running nearly as fast as a 4B-parameter model while delivering roughly 97% of the dense model's quality.

For vision tasks, the 26B A4B shares the same multimodal capabilities as the 31B image understanding with variable aspect ratios and resolutions, and structured bounding box output for UI element detection. The tradeoff versus the 31B dense model is a small quality reduction in exchange for much faster inference and lower hardware requirements, fitting in 18GB of VRAM at 4-bit quantization. It ranked #6 among open models on the Arena AI text leaderboard at launch.

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 4 26B A4B
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2025Apr 2026
Context Window1.0M256K
Parameters25.2B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$0.060
Output $/1M$15.00$0.330
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
ClassificationDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Multimodal Vision
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
68.66%
68.66%
Avg Response Time21.26s30.23s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens294
Median output tokens214
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0001
Defect Detection
80%(12/15)
80%(12/15)
Document Understanding
88.9%(8/9)
88.9%(8/9)
Object Counting
20%(2/10)
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
78.6%(11/14)
85.7%(12/14)
Spatial Understanding
68.4%(13/19)
68.4%(13/19)
OCR
Overall Score
83.84%
Avg Response Time12.05s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens290
Median output tokens42
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark<$0.0001
Focused Scene OCR
85.9%(85/99)
Handwritten Math
50%(5/10)
License Plate Recognition
93.3%(28/30)
Text Recognition
80%(24/30)
VQA & Extraction
83.3%(50/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology