Google Gemma 3n E4B Instructed vs Mistral Mistral NeMo Instruct
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemma 3n E4B Instructed is the more secure of the two: Gemma 3n E4B Instructed scores 49.0% and Mistral NeMo Instruct scores 50.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed is the overall winner in this comparison!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Google Gemma 3n E4B Instructed vs Mistral Mistral NeMo Instruct. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
- Google Gemma 3n E4B Instructed has a lower Overall (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Google Gemma 3n E4B Instructed or Mistral Mistral NeMo Instruct more secure?
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemma 3n E4B Instructed is the more secure of the two: Gemma 3n E4B Instructed scores 49.0% and Mistral NeMo Instruct scores 50.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Gemma 3n E4B Instructed vs Mistral NeMo Instruct?
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed has a 49.0% ASR and Mistral NeMo Instruct has a 50.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Gemma 3n E4B Instructed and Mistral NeMo Instruct tested?
Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.