Pick DeepSeek V4 for near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost or open mit-licensed weights you can self-host. Pick Gemma 4 26B A4B for fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total) or near-31b-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost. On a tight budget at scale, Gemma 4 26B A4B is the value pick.
DeepSeek V4 (DeepSeek, China) and Gemma 4 26B A4B (Google, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. DeepSeek V4 is china's open-weight price earthquake — near-frontier capability at roughly a twelfth of GPT-5.5's cost. Gemma 4 26B A4B is an Apache-2.0 open MoE with 25.2B total but only 3.8B active parameters, delivering near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the inference cost. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Gemma 4 26B A4B is about 2.9× cheaper on input ($0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens vs $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
Context window: DeepSeek V4 holds 3.8× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 256K (~393 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: DeepSeek V4 is the newer model by about 22 days (released April 24, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
DeepSeek V4
Gemma 4 26B A4B
Provider
DeepSeek (China)
Google (US)
Released
April 24, 2026
April 2, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens
$0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
80.6%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost: DeepSeek V4 — A core design strength of DeepSeek V4.
Open MIT-licensed weights you can self-host: DeepSeek V4 — A core design strength of DeepSeek V4.
No long-context surcharge: DeepSeek V4 — A core design strength of DeepSeek V4.
Fast, cheap inference from a sparse MoE (3.8B active of 25.2B total): Gemma 4 26B A4B — A core design strength of Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost: Gemma 4 26B A4B — A core design strength of Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Strong reasoning and coding (88.3% AIME 2026 no-tools, 77.1% LiveCodeBench v6): Gemma 4 26B A4B — A core design strength of Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Lowest cost at scale: Gemma 4 26B A4B — At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input: DeepSeek V4 — Its 1M window is about 3.8× larger, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Gemma 4 26B A4B — At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts DeepSeek V4, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: DeepSeek V4 — Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost: DeepSeek V4 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total): Gemma 4 26B A4B — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: Gemma 4 26B A4B or DeepSeek V4 — Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
DeepSeek V4: where it fits
China's open-weight price earthquake — near-frontier capability at roughly a twelfth of GPT-5.5's cost. Released April 24, 2026 by DeepSeek, it is built for near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost, open MIT-licensed weights you can self-host, no long-context surcharge, and highest LiveCodeBench result.
Its trade-offs are real: trails the very best on hardest agentic coding, and text/code focused, less multimodal. At $0.435 in / $0.87 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Gemma 4 26B A4B: where it fits
An Apache-2.0 open MoE with 25.2B total but only 3.8B active parameters, delivering near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the inference cost. Released April 2, 2026 by Google, it is built for fast, cheap inference from a sparse MoE (3.8B active of 25.2B total), near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost, strong reasoning and coding (88.3% AIME 2026 no-tools, 77.1% LiveCodeBench v6), and multimodal input (text/image, plus video processed as frames up to 60s) with native function calling.
Its trade-offs: all 25.2B parameters must be loaded into memory even though only 3.8B are active per token, and 256K context trails 1M-token frontier rivals, and this variant has no audio input (audio is E2B/E4B/12B only). At $0.15 in / $0.6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." DeepSeek V4 (China) and Gemma 4 26B A4B (US) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Gemma 4 26B A4B is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4 or Gemma 4 26B A4B better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Gemma 4 26B A4B, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, DeepSeek V4 leans toward near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost while Gemma 4 26B A4B leans toward fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper — $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens vs $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens, roughly 2.9× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
DeepSeek V4 — 1M vs 256K, about 3.8× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both DeepSeek V4 and Gemma 4 26B A4B together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you DeepSeek V4, Gemma 4 26B A4B and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, DeepSeek V4 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
DeepSeek V4 — released April 24, 2026, about 22 days after Gemma 4 26B A4B.
DeepSeek V4 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B
DeepSeek · China | Google · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick DeepSeek V4 for near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost or open mit-licensed weights you can self-host. Pick Gemma 4 26B A4B for fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total) or near-31b-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost. On a tight budget at scale, Gemma 4 26B A4B is the value pick.
DeepSeek V4 (DeepSeek, China) and Gemma 4 26B A4B (Google, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. DeepSeek V4 is china's open-weight price earthquake — near-frontier capability at roughly a twelfth of GPT-5.5's cost. Gemma 4 26B A4B is an Apache-2.0 open MoE with 25.2B total but only 3.8B active parameters, delivering near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the inference cost. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Gemma 4 26B A4B is about 2.9× cheaper on input ($0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens vs $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
▸Context window: DeepSeek V4 holds 3.8× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 256K (~393 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: DeepSeek V4 is the newer model by about 22 days (released April 24, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
DeepSeek V4
Gemma 4 26B A4B
Provider
DeepSeek (China)
Google (US)
Released
April 24, 2026
April 2, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens
$0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
80.6%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost
DeepSeek V4
A core design strength of DeepSeek V4.
Open MIT-licensed weights you can self-host
DeepSeek V4
A core design strength of DeepSeek V4.
No long-context surcharge
DeepSeek V4
A core design strength of DeepSeek V4.
Fast, cheap inference from a sparse MoE (3.8B active of 25.2B total)
Gemma 4 26B A4B
A core design strength of Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost
At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
DeepSeek V4
Its 1M window is about 3.8× larger, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Gemma 4 26B A4B
At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts DeepSeek V4, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ DeepSeek V4
Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost
→ DeepSeek V4
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total)
→ Gemma 4 26B A4B
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Gemma 4 26B A4B or DeepSeek V4
Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
DeepSeek V4: where it fits
China's open-weight price earthquake — near-frontier capability at roughly a twelfth of GPT-5.5's cost. Released April 24, 2026 by DeepSeek, it is built for near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost, open MIT-licensed weights you can self-host, no long-context surcharge, and highest LiveCodeBench result.
Its trade-offs are real: trails the very best on hardest agentic coding, and text/code focused, less multimodal. At $0.435 in / $0.87 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Gemma 4 26B A4B: where it fits
An Apache-2.0 open MoE with 25.2B total but only 3.8B active parameters, delivering near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the inference cost. Released April 2, 2026 by Google, it is built for fast, cheap inference from a sparse MoE (3.8B active of 25.2B total), near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost, strong reasoning and coding (88.3% AIME 2026 no-tools, 77.1% LiveCodeBench v6), and multimodal input (text/image, plus video processed as frames up to 60s) with native function calling.
Its trade-offs: all 25.2B parameters must be loaded into memory even though only 3.8B are active per token, and 256K context trails 1M-token frontier rivals, and this variant has no audio input (audio is E2B/E4B/12B only). At $0.15 in / $0.6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." DeepSeek V4 (China) and Gemma 4 26B A4B (US) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Gemma 4 26B A4B is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Want both DeepSeek V4 and Gemma 4 26B A4B without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is DeepSeek V4 or Gemma 4 26B A4B better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Gemma 4 26B A4B, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, DeepSeek V4 leans toward near-frontier coding at ~1/12 the cost while Gemma 4 26B A4B leans toward fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper — $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens vs $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens, roughly 2.9× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
DeepSeek V4 — 1M vs 256K, about 3.8× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both DeepSeek V4 and Gemma 4 26B A4B together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you DeepSeek V4, Gemma 4 26B A4B and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, DeepSeek V4 or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
DeepSeek V4 — released April 24, 2026, about 22 days after Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.