+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 4B vs Gemma 3n E4B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemma 3 4B leads with 19.3% higher average benchmark score. Overall, Gemma 3 4B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
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 E4B was developed as a slightly larger edge-optimized variant, designed to provide enhanced capabilities while still fitting within edge computing constraints. Built to serve applications that can accommodate more parameters for improved quality, it expands the range of edge deployment options.
3 months newer
Gemma 3 4B
2025-03-12
Gemma 3n E4B
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Average Score:72.2%(+19.3%)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Average Score:52.9%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3n E4B
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 E4B
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Avg Score:72.2%(+19.3%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Avg Score:52.9%
Providers:0