+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 4B vs Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemma 3 4B leads with 4.1% higher average benchmark score. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B was developed as a compact yet capable open-source model, designed to strike a balance between performance and resource efficiency. Built with 4 billion parameters and instruction tuning, it provides a practical option for applications requiring moderate capability with manageable computational costs.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3N E2B IT was developed as the instruction-tuned version of Gemma 3N E2B, designed to follow user instructions while maintaining edge-optimized efficiency. Built for applications requiring both compact size and reliable instruction-following, it extends conversational AI to resource-constrained environments.
3 months newer
Gemma 3 4B
2025-03-12
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 9 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Average Score:41.2%(+4.1%)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Average Score:37.1%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
2024-06-01
Gemma 3 4B
2024-08-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 33 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Avg Score:41.2%(+4.1%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Avg Score:37.1%
Providers:0