whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
DeepSeek

DeepSeek V4 Flash

VS
Google

Gemma 4 E4B

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, DeepSeek V4 Flash is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 49.1% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: Gemma 4 E4B is 1.0x cheaper to run. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, Gemma 4 E4B offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of DeepSeek V4 Flash fully justifies the cost.

Model Specs

DeepSeek V4 Flash

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+)
49.1%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+21.4%)
80%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$0.17Input: $0.14 | Output: $0.28
Speed
109.1 tps
Context WindowLarger
1M tokens
Model Specs

Gemma 4 E4B

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/A
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
58.6%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
N/AInput: N/A | Output: N/A
Speed
N/A
Context Window
131.07k tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

Pricing data is currently unavailable for one or both of these models, so a direct cost comparison cannot be determined.

Speed data is not available for Gemma 4 E4B, while DeepSeek V4 Flash generates 109.1 tokens per second.

DeepSeek V4 Flash is better for coding tasks. It scores 49.1% on coding evaluations (swe-bench-pro) compared to Gemma 4 E4B which scores N/A.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard