The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Beam 1.0 vs Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Beam 1.0 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.6 to -11.1.

Reflection AI · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Beam 1.0 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 44.6 to -11.1, ranking #46 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Beam 1.0 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Beam 1.0

  • overall performance matters — it scores 44.6 and ranks #46 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

  • you are already invested in the Google ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Beam 1.0
Reflection AI
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Google
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
44.6
#46
-11.1
#394
Reasoning
45.5
#37
-11.4
#386
Coding
33.7
#39
-4.6
#282
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$0.40 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Beam 1.0
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Math
35.1#45
-8.0#337
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

22 reported for Beam 1.0 · 18 for Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

2 shared

Beam 1.0 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, LiveCodeBench), while Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is better at 0 benchmarks.

Beam 1.0 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

493.3B diff

Beam 1.0 has 493.3B more parameters than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed, making it 6166.3% larger.

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
501.3Bparameters
Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
8.0Bparameters
501.3B
Beam 1.0
8.0B
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Beam 1.0 specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Beam 1.0 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed supports multimodal inputs, whereas Beam 1.0 does not.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Beam 1.0

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Beam 1.0 is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Gemma 3n E2B Instructed uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Beam 1.0

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Beam 1.0 was released on 2026-10-16, while Gemma 3n E2B Instructed was released on 2025-06-26.

Beam 1.0 is 16 months newer than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed.

Beam 1.0

Oct 16, 2026

4 days ago

1.3yr newer
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Jun 26, 2025

1.3 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Beam 1.0 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-30, while Gemma 3n E2B Instructed has a cutoff of 2024-06-01.

Beam 1.0 has more recent training data (up to 2026-06-30), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Gemma 3n E2B Instructed (2024-06-01).

Beam 1.0

Jun 2026

2 yr newer
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Jun 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Beam 1.0 and Gemma 3n E2B Instructed side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Beam 1.0
✓ Preferred
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Beam 1.0 vs Gemma 3n E2B Instructed.

Which is better, Beam 1.0 or Gemma 3n E2B Instructed?

Beam 1.0 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.6 to -11.1. Beam 1.0 is made by Reflection AI and Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Beam 1.0 compare to Gemma 3n E2B Instructed in benchmarks?

Beam 1.0 scores AIME 2026: 97.7%, GPQA: 90.6%, LiveCodeBench: 88.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 81.6%, MCP Atlas: 80.8%. Gemma 3n E2B Instructed scores HumanEval: 66.5%, MMLU: 60.1%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 59.0%, MBPP: 56.6%, Global-MMLU: 55.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Beam 1.0 and Gemma 3n E2B Instructed?

Beam 1.0 supports 1.0M tokens and Gemma 3n E2B Instructed supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Beam 1.0 and Gemma 3n E2B Instructed?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.6 vs -11.1), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Beam 1.0 and Gemma 3n E2B Instructed?

Beam 1.0 is developed by Reflection AI and Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is developed by Google.

Related comparisons