Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Grok 4
Compare Gemma 4 26B A4B and Grok 4 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Grok 4 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Grok 4: Overview
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.
Grok 4, released by xAI on July 9, 2025, is the fourth-generation model in the Grok family and the most advanced to date. It is multimodal, supporting text, vision, tool use, and real-time web search, with a reported 256,000-token context window for long-form reasoning and document analysis. Its training data extends through November 2024, making it the most up-to-date Grok model at launch.
The lineup includes Grok 4 Generalist for broad tasks, Grok 4 Heavy for higher-capacity reasoning, and Grok 4 Code optimized for programming and debugging. A notable feature is its always-on “Think” mode, designed for deeper multi-step reasoning. While xAI has not disclosed parameter counts, Grok 4 is positioned to compete with frontier models like GPT-5 and Claude 4, balancing real-time knowledge via web integration with structured tool use. It is best suited for coding, complex reasoning, and multimodal AI assistants.
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Grok 4 Comparison Table
| Property | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | xAI | |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Apr 2026 | Jul 2025 |
| Context Window | 256K | 256K |
| Parameters | 25.2B | |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.060 | |
| Output $/1M | $0.330 | |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| 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% | 52.24% |
| Avg Response Time | 30.23s | 85.24s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 294 | |
| Median output tokens | 214 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0001 | |
| Defect Detection | 80%(12/15) | 80%(12/15) |
| Document Understanding | 88.9%(8/9) | 44.4%(4/9) |
| Object Counting | 10%(1/10) | 10%(1/10) |
| Object Understanding | 85.7%(12/14) | 57.1%(8/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 68.4%(13/19) | 52.6%(10/19) |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 83.84% | |
| Avg Response Time | 12.05s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 290 | |
| Median output tokens | 42 | |
| 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