+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed vs o1
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
o1 leads with 29.2% higher average benchmark score. o1 offers 236.0K more tokens in context window than Gemma 3n E4B Instructed. Gemma 3n E4B Instructed is $15.00 cheaper per million tokens. Gemma 3n E4B Instructed supports multimodal inputs. Overall, o1 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3N E4B IT was created as the instruction-tuned version of Gemma 3N E4B, designed to combine improved capability with edge optimization. Built for applications requiring both responsive instruction-following and edge-friendly efficiency, it serves as a stronger option for on-device AI assistants.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
o1 was developed as part of OpenAI's reasoning-focused model series, designed to spend more time thinking before responding. Built to excel at complex reasoning tasks in science, coding, and mathematics, it employs extended internal reasoning processes to solve harder problems than traditional language models through careful step-by-step analysis.
6 months newer
o1
OpenAI
2024-12-17
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
Input:$20.00
Output:$40.00($15.00 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
o1
Input:$15.00
Output:$60.00
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 4 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
Average Score:57.6%
+
+
+
+
o1
Average Score:86.8%(+29.2%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
2024-06-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
1 providers
Together
Throughput: 42.09 tok/s
Latency: 0.43ms
+
+
+
+
o1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
Avg Score:57.6%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
o1
Avg Score:86.8%(+29.2%)
Providers:2