Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Google
Google
vs
Minimax
Minimax

Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct vs MiniMax M2.5

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Supports vision

MiniMax M2.5 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Context Window
Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct
Speed
MiniMax M2.5

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureGemma 4 26B A4B InstructMiniMax M2.5
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyGemma 4 26B A4B InstructMiniMax M2.5
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorGoogleMinimax
ReleasedApr 2026Feb 2026

Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct Modalities

Input
imagetextvideo
Output
text

MiniMax M2.5 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct with:

Compare MiniMax M2.5 with:

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.5 has cheaper input pricing at $0.12/M tokens. Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.40/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 37.4, compared to Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct's score of 22.4.
Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct has a 262,144 token context window, while MiniMax M2.5 has a 196,608 token context window.
Gemma 4 26B A4B Instruct supports vision. MiniMax M2.5 does not support vision.