
01
Deeper Thinking and Verification
Carbon spends more thinking tokens per turn than Gemini 4 Argon to explore hypotheses, verify its work and check edge cases before it responds.
Google describes Gemini 4 Carbon as its strongest reasoning model, built for sustained agentic workflows across complex software engineering, multimodal knowledge work and scientific reasoning. It is based on Gemini 4 Argon and spends more thinking tokens on hard problems to explore hypotheses and verify its work.
Automatically append previous messages to maintain multi-turn context. May increase token usage.
Automatically append previous messages to maintain multi-turn context. May increase token usage.
Complete guide to using Gemini 4 Carbon







Model specifications for Gemini 4 Carbon from Google's documentation.
| Specification | Gemini 4 Carbon |
|---|---|
| Developer | |
| Based on | Gemini 4 Argon |
| Input | Text, image, video, audio, PDF |
| Output | Text |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens, shared by input, thinking and output |
| Standard output limit | 65,536 tokens per synchronous response, thinking and answer combined |
| Long decode | Up to 1M tokens minus the input in a single response, thinking and answer combined |
| Thinking levels | Low, medium (default), high; reasoning_effort or generationConfig.thinkingConfig.thinkingLevel on Kie.ai |
| Sampling parameters | Custom temperature, top_p and top_k values are ignored |
| Not supported | Image generation, audio generation, Live API |
| Knowledge cutoff | March 2026 |
Results reported by Google on the Gemini 4 Carbon model card, as of October 2026.
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| AA Index v5.0 | 59 | 50 |
| Vals Index v2.2 | 70.4% | 69.2% |
| SWE-sweep | 9.6% | 4.3% |
| FrontierSWE 2 | 61.2% | 55.0% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 65.2% | 57.1% |
| Agents' Last Exam v1.1 | 77.4% | 69.0% |
| OSWorld-2.1 (offline subset) | 81.5% | 74.7% |
| AutomationBench (Zapier) | 53.9% | 51.3% |
| Chartography | 72.5% | 71.6% |
| GraphWalks (256k to 1M, BFS, F1) | 96.2% | 84.2% |
| RiemannBench | 80.0% | 76.0% |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA) | 64.8% | 52.9% |