Skip to content
Model Pareto

Gemma 4 E2B

Google DeepMindOpen weightsartificialanalysis.ai ↗
Input
—
Output
—
Speed
~96tok/sest.
Context
128Ktokens

Long-tail import from Artificial Analysis (2026-09-24); AA variant: Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning). Price = AA median host price.

Rankings

Self-hostingEstimated

How we estimate →

What it would cost to run these open weights yourself on rented GPUs. No API sells this model, so this is its price on the chart.

Hardware
1× B200 180GB
BF16 weights
Throughput
~19,629 tok/s
many requests batched
Price
$0.035–0.32 /M tok
busy → light use
On your own machine
RTX 5090 32GB (int4, 300+ tok/s single-stream)
single consumer GPU or Mac
Assumptions (5)
  • BF16 weights (5.1B params, 2.3B active per token) + 25% KV-cache headroom ≈ 13 GB
  • 1× B200 180GB at $5.98–$14.24/GPU-hour on-demand (2026-09-24)
  • ~19,629 output tok/s aggregate at batch 256 (bandwidth-bound); MoE compute scales with active params
  • Blended 3:1 input:output; prefill ~231,114 tok/s
  • Low = 75% utilization at the low GPU price; high = 20% at the high price

Benchmark scores

~ italic, dashed = no published score yet, estimated from related benchmarks.

Writing & chat

Vision

MMMUEstimated
~#2 of 3 (estimated)~71.3%
  1. #1Claude Haiku 4.573.2%
  2. ~#2Gemma 4 E2BEstimated71.3%
  3. #2Llama 4 Maverick69.4%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
~last of 9 (estimated)below measured range (<74.5%)
  1. #1Gemini 3.8 Flash86.2%
  2. #2Kimi K384.8%
  3. #8Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite74.5%
  4. ~#9Gemma 4 E2BEstimated<74.5%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
~last of 8 (estimated)below measured range (<75.8%)
  1. #1MiniMax-M391.6%
  2. #2Kimi K391.1%
  3. #7Muse Glimmer75.8%
  4. ~#8Gemma 4 E2BEstimated<75.8%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
GDP.pdf (AA)Estimated
~#41 of 43 (estimated)~0.2%
  1. #1GPT-6 Astra31.0%
  2. #2Muse Spark 1.326.6%
  3. #40Ministral 3 8B0.8%
  4. ~#41Gemma 4 E2BEstimated0.2%
  5. #41Ministral 3 3B0.0%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
ChartographyEstimated
~last of 23 (estimated)below measured range (<9.0%)
  1. #1GPT-6 Astra71.0%
  2. #2Claude Opus 5.566.3%
  3. #22Mistral Large 39.0%
  4. ~#23Gemma 4 E2BEstimated<9.0%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks

Hard reasoning

Agents

~#11 of 12 (estimated)~62.9%
  1. #1Kimi K384.8%
  2. #2Qwen3.8 27B84.3%
  3. #10Muse Glimmer65.9%
  4. ~#11Gemma 4 E2BEstimated62.9%
  5. #11Claude Haiku 4.550.7%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
OSWorld 2.0Estimated
~#3 of 5 (estimated)~53.8%
  1. #1GLM-5.3 Flash59.1%
  2. #2Kimi K358.3%
  3. ~#3Gemma 4 E2BEstimated53.8%
  4. #3GPT-5.6 Terra50.2%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
BrowseCompEstimated
~#17 of 18 (estimated)~33.4%
  1. #1Atria Dawn Preview92.5%
  2. #2GPT-6 Astra91.5%
  3. #16Nemotron 3 Ultra44.4%
  4. ~#17Gemma 4 E2BEstimated33.4%
  5. #17Mistral Small 421.3%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
~#55 of 87 (estimated)~706 Elo
  1. #1Claude Opus 5.51846
  2. #2Claude Fable 5.11735
  3. #54Claude Haiku 4.5719
  4. ~#55Gemma 4 E2BEstimated706
  5. #55MiniCPM5-2B694
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
~#74 of 80 (estimated)~0.3%
  1. #1Claude Opus 5.569.5%
  2. #2DeepSeek V4.1 Flash68.9%
  3. #72Granite 4.2 3B0.4%
  4. ~#74Gemma 4 E2BEstimated0.3%
  5. #74gpt-oss-120b0.2%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks
~#88 of 89 (estimated)~3.6%
  1. #1Muse Spark 1.350.5%
  2. #2GLM-5.350.3%
  3. #86Ministral 3 8B3.7%
  4. ~#88Gemma 4 E2BEstimated3.6%
  5. #88Llama 4 Scout3.3%
No published score — estimated from related benchmarks