Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) vs Ring-2.6-1T

Which is better for the money: Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) by Google or Ring-2.6-1T by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.

Trade-off

GoogleGemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)On the open-weights frontier

Intelligence: 8.90
Total cost: $14.7

InclusionAIRing-2.6-1TOff the frontier

Intelligence: 16.60
Total cost: $576

Verdict

Depends on your budget

Ring-2.6-1T scores 7.7 points higher (16.6 vs 8.9) but costs 39× as much to run the benchmark ($576 vs $14.7; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ring-2.6-1T when you need intelligence above 8.9, and Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) when 8.9 is enough.

Metric	Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)	Ring-2.6-1T	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	8.9	16.6	+86.5% Ring-2.6-1T is 86.5% more intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$14.68	$575.60	+3821.0% Ring-2.6-1T is 39× more expensive
End-to-end time (lower is better)	57.72s	24.07s	−58.3% Ring-2.6-1T is 58.3% faster
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)	$0.02 / $0.10	$0.30 / $2.50
Input modalities	Text, Image, Speech, Video	Text

Ring-2.6-1T vs Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): 86.5% more intelligence, 3821.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 58.3% faster end-to-end.

Open this matchup in the interactive picker Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): what beats it Ring-2.6-1T: what beats it

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.
Ring-2.6-1T is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.

Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)Ring-2.6-1TToday'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/ring-2-6-1t · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/ring-2-6-1t?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill