Roboflow

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GPT-6 Astra

Compare Gemma 4 26B A4B and GPT-6 Astra side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Open Prompt, Object Detection, and Classification.

Compare Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GPT-6 Astra 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
GoogleGemma 4 26B A4B
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-6 Astra
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GPT-6 Astra on Vision Evals

GPT-6 Astra scores higher on all 4 Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where GPT-6 Astra leads 87.2% to 47.7%.

Overall, Gemma 4 26B A4B averages 54.1% (#50 of 63) against 83.4% (#2 of 63) for GPT-6 Astra.

Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper ($0.0019 vs $0.034 per sample), while GPT-6 Astra is faster (9.9s vs 27.8s per sample).

Gemma 4 26B A4BGPT-6 Astra

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GPT-6 Astra Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 20, 2026

PropertyGemma 4 26B A4BGPT-6 Astra
OrganizationGoogleOpenAI
Categoryopenclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateApr 2026Sep 2026
Context Window256K1.1M
Parameters25.2BUndisclosed
LicenseApache 2.0Proprietary
Commercial usefree for commercial usecommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.090$10.00
Output $/1M$0.300$50.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Promptable Concept SegmentationNot listedDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
54.1%
4/5 tasks
83.4%
Quantizationsself-hosted
BF1651.6%FP854.1%AWQ-INT452.0%hardware →
Avg cost / sample$0.0019$0.034
Avg speed / sample27.84s9.94s
By task
Object Detection (low)
44.2%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 43.5 to 44.8
$0
82.1%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.0 to 82.7
$0.050
Object Detection (high)–
83.6%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.5
$0.101
Counting (low)
43.2%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 41.9 to 46.0
$0
80.2%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.018
Counting (high)–
81.1%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.7 to 82.4
$0.028
Identification (low)
81.3%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 84.4
$0
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.013
Identification (high)–
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.014
OCR (low)–
77.8%
$0.034
by category
Single value
60.9%
Transcription
95.9%
Structured JSON
91.8%
Text localization
75.5%
OCR (high)–
77.6%
$0.084
by category
Single value
59.6%
Transcription
97.5%
Structured JSON
91.7%
Text localization
76.8%
Reasoning (low)
47.7%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 45.0 to 49.0
$0
87.2%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.1 to 88.1
$0.016
Reasoning (high)–
91.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 91.4
$0.021

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs GPT-6 Astra: Overview

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.

GPT-6 Astra

GPT-6 Astra is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from OpenAI that accepts text and image input and produces text output. It is positioned as the company's flagship system for long-horizon end-to-end work spanning complex reasoning, software engineering, computer use, browsing, research and document creation. The model exposes a graduated reasoning effort control with low, medium, high, xhigh and max settings, and it accepts a change to that setting partway through a conversation rather than only at request time. It launches as a single tier with no smaller mini or nano variants, carries a context window of roughly 1.05 million tokens with a maximum output of 128,000 tokens, and reports a knowledge cutoff of April 30, 2026.

OpenAI reports evaluation results across agentic, scientific and security benchmarks, including 96.0% on GPQA Diamond, 64.6% on Terminal-Bench Science, 72.6% on OSWorld 2.0, and a perfect score on ExploitBench, along with near saturation on FrontierMath Tier 4 and ARC-AGI-3. The model supports computer use, structured outputs, streaming, programmatic tool calling, multi-agent orchestration, prompt caching and persisted reasoning, and it keeps earlier context windows searchable so it can recover requirements or tool outputs from previous turns. OpenAI describes Astra as the first of its models to cross the Critical cybersecurity capability threshold under its Preparedness Framework.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6 Astra performed better. It scores higher on all 4 vision tasks and averages 83.4% (#2 of 63) against 54.1% (#50 of 63) for Gemma 4 26B A4B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, GPT-6 Astra leads with 87.2% against 47.7%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0019 per sample against $0.034. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GPT-6 Astra is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 9.9s per inference against 27.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.