For Developers/Models/Compare/Gemini 3.5 vs Gemma 4 12B

Gemini 3.5 vs Gemma 4 12B

Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison

Quick take

  • Gemini 3.5 is meaningfully stronger at coding (90 vs 68 on our capability index).
  • Gemma 4 12B is open-weights (free to self-host); Gemini 3.5 is paid API only.
  • Gemma 4 12B has a 256K tokens context window vs 1,048,576 tokens (Gemini 3.5 Flash; Pro variant not yet released) - better for whole-repo or long-document work.

Specs comparison

Gemini 3.5Gemma 4 12B
ProviderGoogle DeepMindGoogle
TypeClosed sourceOpen source
Context window1,048,576 tokens (Gemini 3.5 Flash; Pro variant not yet released)256K tokens
Input / 1M tokens$1.50Free (self-host)
Output / 1M tokens$9.00Free (self-host)
Release date2026-052026-06

Benchmarks

BenchmarkGemini 3.5Gemma 4 12B
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (coding)76.2%-
MCP Atlas (tool use)83.6%-
CharXiv Reasoning (multimodal)84.2%-
Total parameters-~11.95B
Context window-256K tokens

Scores sourced from official provider release posts and independent benchmark aggregators.

Which should you choose?

Choose Gemini 3.5 if...

  • You need frontier agent/coding performance without frontier prices
  • Building autonomous agents that make many tool calls
  • High-throughput production workloads that were previously too costly on a Pro model
  • You want a strong default multimodal model with a 1M-token context window
Full Gemini 3.5 details →

Choose Gemma 4 12B if...

  • You need an open, self-hostable multimodal model
  • Running on a single consumer GPU or a laptop
  • Data-privacy or on-prem requirements
  • You want a permissive license (Apache 2.0) for commercial use
Full Gemma 4 12B details →

Compare Gemini 3.5 with others