Roboflow

Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Ember

Gemini 4 Argon and Muse Ember score 87.5% vs 76.6% averaged across five Vision Evals tasks (#1 and #16 of 67 models), so Gemini 4 Argon leads overall.

  • Gemini 4 Argon wins all 5 tasks, with its widest lead on object detection (82.5% vs 63.8%).
  • Muse Ember is about 1/6 of the cost: $0.0009 vs $0.0058 overall average cost per sample.
  • Muse Ember is faster: 6.1s vs 13.4s per sample.

Compare Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Ember live

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

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Ember on Vision Evals

Score by taskGemini 4 ArgonMuse Ember
Object Detection
82.5
63.8
OCR
85.7
69.5
Reasoning
89.4
78.2
Counting
86.0
79.7
Identification
93.8
91.7

Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.

Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Ember Comparison Table

Evals updated November 10, 2026Pricing updated November 10, 2026

PropertyGemini 4 ArgonMuse Ember
OrganizationGoogleMeta
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateOct 2026Nov 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUndisclosedUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$0.100
Output $/1M$10.00$0.500
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoSupported
ClassificationDemoSupported
Object DetectionDemoSupported
OCRDemoSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoSupported
Promptable Concept SegmentationDemoNot listed
Both support 5 more tasks
Model Features
Both support 3 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
87.5%
76.6%
Avg cost / sample$0.0058$0.0009
Avg speed / sample13.40s6.08s
By task
Object Detection (low)
82.5%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.9 to 83.0
$0.011
63.8%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.3 to 64.3
$0.0011
Object Detection (high)
85.1%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.3 to 85.5
$0.027
64.0%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 64.5
$0.0017
Counting (low)
86.0%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.1 to 86.5
$0.0024
79.7%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.0006
Counting (high)
90.5%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 91.9
$0.010
79.3%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7
$0.0011
Identification (low)
93.8%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 93.8
$0.0024
91.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0004
Identification (high)
96.9%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9
$0.0057
90.6%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0007
OCR (low)
85.7%
$0.0051
69.5%
$0.0010
by category
Single value
78.3%
Transcription
95.5%
Structured JSON
92.6%
Text localization
81.5%
Single value
61.7%
Transcription
95.5%
Structured JSON
85.1%
Text localization
35.3%
OCR (high)
88.0%
$0.022
70.5%
$0.0017
by category
Single value
80.0%
Transcription
98.8%
Structured JSON
94.8%
Text localization
84.7%
Single value
63.0%
Transcription
90.2%
Structured JSON
87.2%
Text localization
35.9%
Reasoning (low)
89.4%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.1 to 90.7
$0.0024
78.2%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.8 to 79.5
$0.0006
Reasoning (high)
91.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 92.0
$0.013
81.9%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.1 to 83.4
$0.0013

Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Ember: Overview

Gemini 4 Argon

Gemini 4 Argon is Google DeepMind's frontier Gemini 4 model, built to sustain extended reasoning across long-horizon workflows in software engineering, enterprise knowledge work such as legal and finance, scientific analysis, and defensive cybersecurity. It accepts text, image, video, and document input and returns text, operating over a one million token context window. The model raises the maximum output length to one million tokens, compared with a 64K ceiling on earlier Gemini releases, so a single reasoning trajectory can run for hundreds of thousands of tokens before terminating.

On the visual side, Argon targets multimodal document comprehension, professional chart analysis, and retrieval of specific details from long recordings, reporting 91.7% on LVBench for long-video understanding and 71.6% on Chartography for chart reasoning. Google also reports 77.9% on DeepSWE v1.1, 51.3% on AutomationBench, 68% on CWE-bench v1, and first place on the Vals Index, which aggregates finance, coding, legal, and tax tasks. Following Gemini API conventions, it localizes objects by emitting bounding boxes as [ymin, xmin, ymax, xmax] integers normalized to a 0 to 1000 range, which supports prompt driven detection and grounding alongside captioning, document parsing, and visual question answering. Google describes adversarial training and automated red teaming for indirect prompt injection resistance, plus chain-of-thought and action monitors that halt execution when behavior drifts outside user intent.

Muse Ember

Muse Ember is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta, released on November 9, 2026. It accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents and returns text. The Meta Model API serves it as muse-ember-1.0, with a 1,048,576-token context window and up to 524,288 output tokens. Reasoning effort is adjustable from minimal to max.

Meta positions Ember for repeated tasks within larger agent workflows: tool calls, routing, coding subtasks, and processing collections of images and documents. It can caption or sort photos and extract fields from records while a larger Muse model handles planning. Meta recommends Spark or Wonder for harder single-shot coding and knowledge-heavy problems. Ember is available as a hosted model; its weights are not publicly released.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 4 Argon performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 87.5% (#1 of 67) against 76.6% (#16 of 67) for Muse Ember. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Gemini 4 Argon leads with 82.5% against 63.8%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Muse Ember is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0009 per sample against $0.0058. Gemini 4 Argon is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output; Muse Ember is priced at $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.50 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Muse Ember is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.1s per inference against 13.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.