Gemini 4 Carbon vs Gemma 4 12B
Gemini 4 Carbon: 89.4% average across five Vision Evals tasks (#1 of 68 models). We have not run Gemma 4 12B through Roboflow's Vision Evals, so there is no head-to-head score.
Compare Gemini 4 Carbon vs Gemma 4 12B 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 Carbon vs Gemma 4 12B Comparison Table
Evals updated November 10, 2026
| Property | Gemini 4 Carbon | Gemma 4 12B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | ||
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Nov 2026 | Jun 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | — |
| Parameters | Unknown | 12B |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | free for commercial use |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Supported |
| OCR | Demo | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Supported |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Not listed |
| Classification | Demo | Not listed |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Not listed |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Not listed |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Not listed |
| Object Detection | Demo | Not listed |
| Promptable Concept Segmentation | Demo | Not listed |
Both support 1 more task | ||
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Not listed |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Not listed |
Both support 1 more feature | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 89.4% | Not evaluated |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0061 | – |
| Avg speed / sample | 8.71s | – |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 84.5% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.2 to 84.8 | – |
| Object Detection (high) | 85.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.6 to 86.2 | – |
| Counting (low) | 90.1% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 91.9 | – |
| Counting (high) | 86.9% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 83.8 to 89.2 | – |
| Identification (low) | 93.8% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 93.8 | – |
| Identification (high) | 96.9% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9 | – |
| OCR (low) | 87.2% | – |
| by category |
| |
| OCR (high) | 89.7% | – |
| by category |
| |
| Reasoning (low) | 91.4% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.1 to 93.4 | – |
| Reasoning (high) | 92.3% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.0 to 92.7 | – |
Gemini 4 Carbon vs Gemma 4 12B: Overview
Gemini 4 Carbon is a multimodal model from Google. It builds on Gemini 4 Argon and supports reasoning over text and images. Google describes improvements in coding and long-running tasks. Model weights are not publicly released.
Gemma 4 12B is an open-weight multimodal model from Google in the Gemma 4 family. It is intended for text and image understanding tasks such as visual question answering, OCR, captioning, and document understanding, with a smaller parameter footprint than the larger Gemma 4 variants.
This entry is connected to Roboflow Playground vision evals for comparison. No runnable Playground workflow is configured yet, so the model page is used for discovery and benchmark context rather than direct hosted inference.