Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Which is better for the money: Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) by Google or Qwen3.7 Plus by Alibaba? 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
Qwen3.7 Plus scores 16.3 points higher (25.2 vs 8.9) but costs 29× as much to run the benchmark ($428 vs $14.7; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Plus when you need intelligence above 8.9, and Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) when 8.9 is enough.
| Metric | Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.9 | 25.2 | +183.1% Qwen3.7 Plus is 2.8× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.68 | $427.73 | +2813.7% Qwen3.7 Plus is 29× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.75s | 44.78s | −22.5% Qwen3.7 Plus is 22.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.02 / $0.10 | $0.40 / $1.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.7 Plus vs Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): 183.1% more intelligence, 2813.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 22.5% 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.
- Qwen3.7 Plus is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)Qwen3.7 PlusToday'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/qwen3-7-plus · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/qwen3-7-plus?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill