DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Fugu vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed
Fugu comes out ahead, 66 to 63 and 51 on our weighted score.
GoogleDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
51/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context262K
- Our pick
Sakana AI
Fugu
66/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1M
Moonshot AIKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed
63/100- ECI—
- Price$1.90 / $8.00
- Context262K
Fugu is our pick
Fugu is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (63) and DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT (51). It leads on context window. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed wins on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed $3.42 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT and Fugu unpriced
- Longest contextFuguFugu 1,000,000 · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT 262,144 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT: Text, Images · Fugu: Text, Images · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT and Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT | Fugu | Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 60 | 70 | 80 |
| Context window | 40% | 37 | 60 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 51/100 | 66/100 | 63/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITGoogle | FuguSakana AI | Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | — | — | $1.90 |
| Output | — | — | $8.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | — | $3.42 |
| Long-context rate | — | — | Same rate |
| Price source | — | — | Median of 11 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | — | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yeshigh · xhigh | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache 2.0 | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | fugu | — |
| API providers | 1 | 1 | 11 (best) |
| Released | Jun 9, 2026 | Jun 15, 2026 | Jun 12, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2025 | — | Jan 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT—
- Fugu—
- Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed$35.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT, Fugu or Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed?
Fugu is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (63) and DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT (51). It leads on context window. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed wins on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT, Fugu or Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed?
Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed is cheaper at $1.90 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.42 per million tokens for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed versus . DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT and Fugu has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT has not been scored yet, Fugu has not been scored yet and Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT, Fugu and Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Fugu has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT and 262,144 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed. Maximum output per response: DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT up to 32,768, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed up to 262,144 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT accepts text and images; Fugu accepts text and images; Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed accepts text, images and video. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT and Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Fugu is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Fugu is the newest, released Jun 15, 2026. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed came out Jun 12, 2026; DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT came out Jun 9, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT Jan 2025, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed Jan 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
