Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) vs GPT-6 Astra (High)
Which is better for the money: Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) by Google or GPT-6 Astra (High) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-6 Astra (High) scores 42.0 points higher (50.9 vs 8.9) but costs 199× as much to run the benchmark ($2925 vs $14.7; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-6 Astra (High) when you need intelligence above 8.9, and Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) when 8.9 is enough.
| Metric | Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) | GPT-6 Astra (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.9 | 50.9 | +471.9% GPT-6 Astra (High) is 5.7× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.68 | $2,925.01 | +19825.1% GPT-6 Astra (High) is 199× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.75s | 45.44s | −21.3% GPT-6 Astra (High) is 21.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.02 / $0.10 | $10.0 / $50.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image |
GPT-6 Astra (High) vs Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): 471.9% more intelligence, 19825.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 21.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- GPT-6 Astra (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)GPT-6 Astra (High)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/gpt-6-astra-high · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/gpt-6-astra-high?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill