CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Live
Leaderboard
Models
Compare
Best of & Stacks
Research & News
…
CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

Theme:
Currency:
  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. Google: Gemma 3n 4B vs Kimi Chat 1.5

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Google: Gemma 3n 4B vs Kimi Chat 1.5 benchmark

In this head-to-head showdown, Google: Gemma 3n 4B is more budget-friendly at $0.12/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.

Executive Comparison Verdict

Bottom Line: Both Google: Gemma 3n 4B and Kimi Chat 1.5 present distinct architectural strengths. Compare the verified benchmark matrix below to choose the model tailored to your specific application requirements.
Share Analysis:
WhatsAppTelegramXLinkedInReddit
Google
Google: Gemma 3n 4B

Auto-discovered from OpenRouter (google/gemma-3n-e4b-it). Preview until a second source matches.

$0.12/1M out
Moonshot
Kimi Chat 1.5

Moonshot ultra-long context model supporting up to 2 million tokens per request.

2M ContextElo 1,420$0.8/1M out
Top Rival Showdowns for Google: Gemma 3n 4B
All Matchups
Compare vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5vs GPT-5vs Grok 4.6vs DeepSeek V4 Provs Qwen 3 Max
Preference Leader

No shared data

Single model data

Throughput Leader

No shared data

No latency data

Value per Dollar Leader

Google: Gemma 3n 4B

$0.12 / 1M output

Capability Percentiles

Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect
Percentile 0–100
Dimensional AdvantageKimi Chat 1.5 5/6
Head-to-Head Comparison

Overall Matchup Breakdown

Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.

Google: Gemma 3n 4B (2)vsKimi Chat 1.5 (8)
Google: Gemma 3n 4B: 2W (20%)Overall: Kimi Chat 1.5Kimi Chat 1.5: 8W (80%)
← Google: Gemma 3n 4BKimi Chat 1.5 →
Kimi Chat 1.5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo
—vs1,420
Coding Elo
—vs1,390
SWE-bench
—vs51%
LiveBench
—vs58%
GPQA Diamond
—vs71.5%
Google: Gemma 3n 4B: 0WKimi Chat 1.5: 5W
Kimi Chat 1.5 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed
—vs95 tok/s
Time to first token
—vs210 ms
Google: Gemma 3n 4B: 0WKimi Chat 1.5: 2W
Google: Gemma 3n 4B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price
$0.12/1Mvs$0.8/1M
Input price
$0.06/1Mvs$0.2/1M
Context window
33kvs2M
Google: Gemma 3n 4B: 2WKimi Chat 1.5: 1W

Side-by-Side Benchmark Matrix

Preference Elo
Google: Gemma 3n 4B—
Kimi Chat 1.51,420
lmarena · Aug 17, 2026
Coding Elo
Google: Gemma 3n 4B—
Kimi Chat 1.51,390
lmarena · Aug 17, 2026
LiveBench
Google: Gemma 3n 4B—
Kimi Chat 1.558%
livebench · Aug 17, 2026
SWE-bench
Google: Gemma 3n 4B—
Kimi Chat 1.551%
swebench · Aug 17, 2026
GPQA Diamond
Google: Gemma 3n 4B—
Kimi Chat 1.571.5%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Time to first token
Google: Gemma 3n 4B—
Kimi Chat 1.5210 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Output speed
Google: Gemma 3n 4B—
Kimi Chat 1.595 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Input priceGoogle: Gemma 3n 4B (+$0.14/1M)
Google: Gemma 3n 4B$0.06/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
Kimi Chat 1.5$0.2/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Output priceGoogle: Gemma 3n 4B (+$0.68/1M)
Google: Gemma 3n 4B$0.12/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
Kimi Chat 1.5$0.8/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Context windowKimi Chat 1.5 (+2M)
Google: Gemma 3n 4B33k
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
Kimi Chat 1.52M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
BenchmarkGoogle: Gemma 3n 4BKimi Chat 1.5Advantage Delta
Preference Elo—
1,420
lmarena · Aug 17, 2026
—
Coding Elo—
1,390
lmarena · Aug 17, 2026
—
LiveBench—
58%
livebench · Aug 17, 2026
—
SWE-bench—
51%
swebench · Aug 17, 2026
—
GPQA Diamond—
71.5%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
—
Time to first token—
210 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
—
Output speed—
95 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
—
Input price
$0.06/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
$0.2/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Google: Gemma 3n 4B (+$0.14/1M)
Output price
$0.12/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
$0.8/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Google: Gemma 3n 4B (+$0.68/1M)
Context window
33k
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
2M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Kimi Chat 1.5 (+2M)
Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 79% with Google: Gemma 3n 4B
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
Google: Gemma 3n 4B$3.90 / mo
In: $2.1Out: $1.8
Kimi Chat 1.5$19.00 / mo
In: $7Out: $12
Estimated Cost Delta

Google: Gemma 3n 4B is estimated to save $15.10/month ($181/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    Google: Gemma 3n 4B:Pick Google: Gemma 3n 4B when you are optimizing output cost.
  • 2
    Kimi Chat 1.5:Pick Kimi Chat 1.5 for million-token RAG or long-document jobs.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatGoogle: Gemma 3n 4B

Lower output list price ($0.12/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGKimi Chat 1.5

Larger window (2M).

Screenshots / visionKimi Chat 1.5

Kimi Chat 1.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsinsufficient dataNeed SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chatGoogle: Gemma 3n 4BLower output list price ($0.12/1M).
Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient dataNeed TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAGKimi Chat 1.5Larger window (2M).
Screenshots / visionKimi Chat 1.5Kimi Chat 1.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.
Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/gemma-3n-e4b-it-vs-kimi-1-5-long/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE
VS
Google

Google: Gemma 3n 4B

Elo n/a
LiveBench—
SWE-bench—
Speed—
Output cost$0.12/1M
Moonshot

Kimi Chat 1.5

Elo 1,420
LiveBench58%
SWE-bench51%
Speed95 tok/s
Output cost$0.8/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Google: Gemma 3n 4B or Kimi Chat 1.5?
We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Google: Gemma 3n 4B or Kimi Chat 1.5?
SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Google: Gemma 3n 4B output tokens are $0.12/1M versus $0.8/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Google: Gemma 3n 4B or Kimi Chat 1.5?
We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?
Kimi Chat 1.5 accepts 2M tokens versus 33k.
Can I self-host either model?
Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Google: Gemma 3n 4B and Kimi Chat 1.5 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Google: Gemma 3n 4B matchups →|All Kimi Chat 1.5 matchups →
Kimi Chat 1.5 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2 0711 (next kimi)Gemini 3 Pro vs Kimi Chat 1.5Gemini 3 Flash vs Kimi Chat 1.5Kimi K3 vs Kimi Chat 1.5Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Kimi Chat 1.5Gemini 3.6 Pro vs Kimi Chat 1.5