Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Reka Flash 3.1

Google · US  |  Reka AI · 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 Reka Flash 3.1 for a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists) or strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original flash 3. On a tight budget at scale, Reka Flash 3.1 is the value pick.

Gemma 4 26B A4B (Google) and Reka Flash 3.1 (Reka AI) 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. Reka Flash 3.1 is reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecGemma 4 26B A4BReka Flash 3.1
ProviderGoogle (US) Reka AI (US)
ReleasedApril 2, 2026 July 2025
Context window256K (~393 pages) 32K (~49 pages)
Price (in/out)$0.12/$0.37 per 1M tokens Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?Yes — self-hostable Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, image, video, code text, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Fast, cheap inference from a sparse MoE (3.8B active of 25.2B total)

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 carries the larger 256K context.

Near-31B-dense quality at a fraction of the compute and memory-bandwidth cost

Gemma 4 26B A4B

Its 256K window holds about 8× more than Reka Flash 3.1's 32K in a single prompt.

Strong reasoning and coding (88.3% AIME 2026 no-tools, 77.1% LiveCodeBench v6)

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 is the newer of the two.

A 21B-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists)

Reka Flash 3.1

Gemma 4 26B A4B is comparatively weak here — all 25.2B parameters must be loaded into memory even though only 3.8B are active per token

Strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original Flash 3

Reka Flash 3.1

Reka Flash 3.1 lists strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original Flash 3 among its strengths; Gemma 4 26B A4B does not.

Fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team

Reka Flash 3.1

Gemma 4 26B A4B is comparatively weak here — 256K context trails 1M-token frontier rivals, and this variant has no audio input (audio is E2B/E4B/12B only)

Lowest cost at scale

Reka Flash 3.1

Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Gemma 4 26B A4B's $0.12/$0.37 per 1M tokens.

Largest single-prompt input

Gemma 4 26B A4B

Its 256K window is about 8× larger than Reka Flash 3.1's 32K, fitting roughly 393 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Reka Flash 3.1

At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Gemma 4 26B A4B, 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.

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 a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists)

Reka Flash 3.1

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 $0.12 in / $0.37 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

Reka Flash 3.1: where it fits

Reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni. Released July 2025 by Reka AI, it is built for a 21B-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists), strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original Flash 3, fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team, and built by alumni from Google DeepMind and Meta's AI labs.

Its trade-offs: a relatively small 32K context window next to million-token frontier models, smaller and less capable overall than flagship frontier models from major labs, and reka's broader roadmap has shifted toward robotics/world models after merging with Moonvalley in June 2026, raising questions about ongoing LLM investment. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

The bottom line for this matchup

Gemma 4 26B A4B and Reka Flash 3.1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Reka Flash 3.1 costs less per token; Gemma 4 26B A4B holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Gemma 4 26B A4B for fast, cheap inference from a sparse moe (3.8b active of 25.2b total), Reka Flash 3.1 for a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.

Want both Gemma 4 26B A4B and Reka Flash 3.1 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.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B or Reka Flash 3.1 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 Reka Flash 3.1 leans toward a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Reka Flash 3.1?

Reka Flash 3.1 is cheaper — $0.12/$0.37 per 1M tokens vs Open weight (self-host / free).

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemma 4 26B A4B — 256K vs 32K, about 8× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both Gemma 4 26B A4B and Reka Flash 3.1 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Gemma 4 26B A4B, Reka Flash 3.1 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 Reka Flash 3.1?

Gemma 4 26B A4B — released April 2, 2026, about 9 months after Reka Flash 3.1.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.