Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) by Google or Qwen3 Coder Next 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 Coder Next scores 0.3 points higher (9.2 vs 8.9) but costs 28× as much to run the benchmark ($405 vs $14.7; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3 Coder Next when you need intelligence above 8.9, and Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) when 8.9 is enough.
| Metric | Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.9 | 9.2 | +3.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 3.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.68 | $405.10 | +2659.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 28× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.75s | 6.44s | −88.8% Qwen3 Coder Next is 88.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.02 / $0.10 | $0.31 / $1.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): 3.4% more intelligence, 2659.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 88.8% 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 Coder Next 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 Coder NextToday'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-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill