Qwen3 Embedding 4B vs Gemini text-embedding-004

Detailed comparison between Qwen3 Embedding 4B and Gemini text-embedding-004. See which embedding best meets your accuracy and performance needs. If you want to compare these models on your data, try Agentset.

Model Comparison

Qwen3 Embedding 4B takes the lead.

Both Qwen3 Embedding 4B and Gemini text-embedding-004 are powerful embedding models designed to improve retrieval quality in RAG applications. However, their performance characteristics differ in important ways.

Why Qwen3 Embedding 4B:

  • Qwen3 Embedding 4B has 116 higher ELO rating
  • Qwen3 Embedding 4B delivers better accuracy (nDCG@10: 0.705 vs 0.538)
  • Qwen3 Embedding 4B has a 16.1% higher win rate

Overview

Key metrics

ELO Rating

Overall ranking quality

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

1482

Gemini text-embedding-004

1366

Win Rate

Head-to-head performance

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

44.6%

Gemini text-embedding-004

28.4%

Accuracy (nDCG@10)

Ranking quality metric

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

0.705

Gemini text-embedding-004

0.538

Average Latency

Response time

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

29ms

Gemini text-embedding-004

16ms

Embedding Models Are Just One Piece of RAG

Agentset gives you a managed RAG pipeline with the top-ranked models and best practices baked in. No infrastructure to maintain, no embeddings to manage.

Trusted by teams building production RAG applications

5M+
Documents
1,500+
Teams
99.9%
Uptime

Visual Performance Analysis

Performance

ELO Rating Comparison

Win/Loss/Tie Breakdown

Accuracy Across Datasets (nDCG@10)

Latency Distribution (ms)

Breakdown

How the models stack up

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BGemini text-embedding-004Description
Overall Performance
ELO Rating
1482
1366
Overall ranking quality based on pairwise comparisons
Win Rate
44.6%
28.4%
Percentage of comparisons won against other models
Pricing & Availability
Price per 1M tokens
$0.020
$0.020
Cost per million tokens processed
Dimensions
2560
768
Vector embedding dimensions (lower is more efficient)
Release Date
2025-06-06
2024-05-14
Model release date
Accuracy Metrics
Avg nDCG@10
0.705
0.538
Normalized discounted cumulative gain at position 10
Performance Metrics
Avg Latency
29ms
16ms
Average response time across all datasets

Build RAG in Minutes, Not Months

Agentset gives you a complete RAG API with top-ranked embedding models and smart retrieval built in. Upload your data, call the API, and get accurate results from day one.

import { Agentset } from "agentset";

const agentset = new Agentset();
const ns = agentset.namespace("ns_1234");

const results = await ns.search(
  "What is multi-head attention?"
);

for (const result of results) {
  console.log(result.text);
}

Dataset Performance

By field

Comprehensive comparison of accuracy metrics (nDCG, Recall) and latency percentiles for each benchmark dataset.

business reports

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BGemini text-embedding-004Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
29ms
15ms
Average response time
P50
29ms
15ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
29ms
15ms
90th percentile

DBPedia

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BGemini text-embedding-004Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.799
0.747
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.787
0.737
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.061
0.057
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.119
0.108
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
26ms
14ms
Average response time
P50
26ms
14ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
26ms
14ms
90th percentile

FiQa

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BGemini text-embedding-004Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.838
0.744
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.836
0.730
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.719
0.647
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.839
0.752
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
23ms
16ms
Average response time
P50
23ms
16ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
23ms
16ms
90th percentile

SciFact

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BGemini text-embedding-004Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.666
0.728
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.697
0.729
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.782
0.813
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.891
0.857
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
38ms
15ms
Average response time
P50
38ms
15ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
38ms
15ms
90th percentile

MSMARCO

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BGemini text-embedding-004Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.974
0.932
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.954
0.918
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.124
0.117
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.224
0.208
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
31ms
18ms
Average response time
P50
31ms
18ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
31ms
18ms
90th percentile

ARCD

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BGemini text-embedding-004Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.857
0.021
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.864
0.027
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.940
0.040
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.960
0.060
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
25ms
15ms
Average response time
P50
25ms
15ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
25ms
15ms
90th percentile

Explore More

Compare more embeddings

See how all embedding models stack up. Compare OpenAI, Cohere, Jina AI, Voyage, and more. View comprehensive benchmarks, compare performance metrics, and find the perfect embedding for your RAG application.