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. Pick Grok Code Fast 1 for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 or low-latency code generation and terminal tasks. Choose Gemma 4 26B A4B if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Grok Code Fast 1 if you want a managed API.
Gemma 4 26B A4B (Google) and Grok Code Fast 1 (xAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. 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. Grok Code Fast 1 is xAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Gemma 4 26B A4B is about 1.3× cheaper on input ($0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens vs $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens) — modest, but it adds up at steady volume.
Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: Gemma 4 26B A4B is the newer model by about 7 months (released April 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Gemma 4 26B A4B
Grok Code Fast 1
Provider
Google (US)
xAI (US)
Released
April 2, 2026
August 28, 2025
Context window
256K (~393 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens
$0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, video, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Fast, cheap inference from a sparse MoE (3.8B active of 25.2B total): Gemma 4 26B A4B — At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok Code Fast 1 ($0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost: Gemma 4 26B A4B — 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 — and it runs cheaper at $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens.
Strong reasoning and coding (88.3% AIME 2026 no-tools, 77.1% LiveCodeBench v6): Gemma 4 26B A4B — Grok Code Fast 1 is comparatively weak here — a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner
Fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50: Grok Code Fast 1 — Grok Code Fast 1 lists fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 among its strengths; Gemma 4 26B A4B does not.
Low-latency code generation and terminal tasks: Grok Code Fast 1 — Grok Code Fast 1 lists low-latency code generation and terminal tasks among its strengths; Gemma 4 26B A4B does not.
High-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality: Grok Code Fast 1 — Grok Code Fast 1 lists high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality among its strengths; Gemma 4 26B A4B does not.
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.
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 Grok Code Fast 1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Gemma 4 26B A4B — Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: Gemma 4 26B A4B — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Grok Code Fast 1 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total): Gemma 4 26B A4B — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50: Grok Code Fast 1 — That is its strongest area.
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 are real: 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.
Grok Code Fast 1: where it fits
XAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Released August 28, 2025 by xAI, it is built for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, low-latency code generation and terminal tasks, high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality, and a 256K window sized for real codebases.
Its trade-offs: text and code only — no image, audio or video input, xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score, a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner, and narrow focus — built for code, not general knowledge work. At $0.2 in / $1.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Gemma 4 26B A4B gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Grok Code Fast 1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 4 26B A4B or Grok Code Fast 1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Gemma 4 26B A4B leans toward fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total) while Grok Code Fast 1 leans toward fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Grok Code Fast 1?
Gemma 4 26B A4B is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Grok Code Fast 1 is API-metered at $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Gemma 4 26B A4B and Grok Code Fast 1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Gemma 4 26B A4B, Grok Code Fast 1 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, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Grok Code Fast 1?
Gemma 4 26B A4B — released April 2, 2026, about 7 months after Grok Code Fast 1.
Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Grok Code Fast 1
Google · US | xAI · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
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. Pick Grok Code Fast 1 for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 or low-latency code generation and terminal tasks. Choose Gemma 4 26B A4B if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Grok Code Fast 1 if you want a managed API.
Gemma 4 26B A4B (Google) and Grok Code Fast 1 (xAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. 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. Grok Code Fast 1 is xAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Gemma 4 26B A4B is about 1.3× cheaper on input ($0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens vs $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens) — modest, but it adds up at steady volume.
▸Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: Gemma 4 26B A4B is the newer model by about 7 months (released April 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Gemma 4 26B A4B
Grok Code Fast 1
Provider
Google (US)
xAI (US)
Released
April 2, 2026
August 28, 2025
Context window
256K (~393 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens
$0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, video, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Fast, cheap inference from a sparse MoE (3.8B active of 25.2B total)
Gemma 4 26B A4B
At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok Code Fast 1 ($0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost
Gemma 4 26B A4B
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 — and it runs cheaper at $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens.
Grok Code Fast 1 is comparatively weak here — a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner
Fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 among its strengths; Gemma 4 26B A4B does not.
Low-latency code generation and terminal tasks
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists low-latency code generation and terminal tasks among its strengths; Gemma 4 26B A4B does not.
High-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality among its strengths; Gemma 4 26B A4B does not.
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.
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 Grok Code Fast 1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Gemma 4 26B A4B
Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Gemma 4 26B A4B
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Grok Code Fast 1 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total)
→ Gemma 4 26B A4B
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50
→ Grok Code Fast 1
That is its strongest area.
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 are real: 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.
Grok Code Fast 1: where it fits
XAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Released August 28, 2025 by xAI, it is built for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, low-latency code generation and terminal tasks, high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality, and a 256K window sized for real codebases.
Its trade-offs: text and code only — no image, audio or video input, xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score, a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner, and narrow focus — built for code, not general knowledge work. At $0.2 in / $1.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Gemma 4 26B A4B gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Grok Code Fast 1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Gemma 4 26B A4B and Grok Code Fast 1 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 Gemma 4 26B A4B or Grok Code Fast 1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Gemma 4 26B A4B leans toward fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total) while Grok Code Fast 1 leans toward fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Grok Code Fast 1?
Gemma 4 26B A4B is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Grok Code Fast 1 is API-metered at $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Gemma 4 26B A4B and Grok Code Fast 1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Gemma 4 26B A4B, Grok Code Fast 1 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, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Grok Code Fast 1?
Gemma 4 26B A4B — released April 2, 2026, about 7 months after Grok Code Fast 1.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.