Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersThe learned values that shape how a model responds. B means billion and T means trillion. For mixture-of-experts models, the total count is larger than the number active for each token. Parameter count alone does not measure quality. | 5.1B/8B/26B/31B | 0.5B/1.5B/3B/7B/14B/32B |
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 256k | 128k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.042Darkbloom | $0.66Cloudflare |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $0.18Makora | $1.00Cloudflare |
| $19.40Darkbloom | $182Cloudflare | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 25% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | |
| Release date | Apr 2 2026 | Nov 12 2024 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Gemma 4vsClaude Haiku 5.5Qwen2.5-CodervsClaude Haiku 5.5Gemma 4vsGPT-6.1 SolQwen2.5-CodervsGPT-6.1 SolGemma 4vsMuse Spark OpenQwen2.5-CodervsMuse Spark OpenGemma 4vsGrok 4.7Qwen2.5-CodervsGrok 4.7Gemma 4vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Qwen2.5-CodervsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Gemma 4vsMistral Large 4Qwen2.5-CodervsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Gemma 4 and Qwen2.5-Coder don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Qwen2.5-Coder shipped 506 days before Gemma 4, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Gemma 4 has 5.1B/8B/26B/31B parameters, while Qwen2.5-Coder has 0.5B/1.5B/3B/7B/14B/32B. Context windows are 256k (Gemma 4) vs 128k (Qwen2.5-Coder).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Gemma 4 and Qwen2.5-Coder don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.