Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Step 3.5 Flash 2603 vs Seed 2.0 Mini
Seed 2.0 Mini comes out ahead, 80 to 76 and 62 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
GoogleGemma 4 E4B IT
76/100- ECI—
- Price$0.11 / $0.15
- Context131K
StepFunStep 3.5 Flash 2603
62/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.30
- Context256K
- Our pick
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Mini
80/100- ECI—
- Price$0.03 / $0.297
- Context256K
Seed 2.0 Mini is our pick
Seed 2.0 Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Gemma 4 E4B IT (76) and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 (62). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. 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 priceSeed 2.0 MiniSeed 2.0 Mini $0.097 · Gemma 4 E4B IT $0.12 · Step 3.5 Flash 2603 $0.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextStep 3.5 Flash 2603 and Seed 2.0 MiniStep 3.5 Flash 2603 256,000 · Seed 2.0 Mini 256,000 · Gemma 4 E4B IT 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsGemma 4 E4B IT and Seed 2.0 MiniGemma 4 E4B IT: Text, Images, Audio · Step 3.5 Flash 2603: Text · Seed 2.0 Mini: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingGemma 4 E4B IT and Step 3.5 Flash 2603Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Gemma 4 E4B IT | Step 3.5 Flash 2603 | Seed 2.0 Mini |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 94 | 89 | 98 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 35 | 80 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 36 | 36 |
| Overall | 100% | 76/100 | 62/100 | 80/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Gemma 4 E4B ITGoogle | Step 3.5 Flash 2603StepFun | Seed 2.0 MiniByteDance Seed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.11 | $0.10 | $0.03 (best) |
| Output | $0.15 (best) | $0.30 | $0.297 |
| Cached input | — | $0.02 | $0.0059 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.12 | $0.15 | $0.097 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Over 32K: $0.059 / $0.594 |
| Price source | Median of 2 providers | Official StepFun (Global) API | Official Volcengine Ark API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 256,000 tokens (best) | 256,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 256,000 tokens (best) | 32,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | Yes | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yeslow · high | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | step-3.5-flash-2603 | doubao-seed-2-0-mini-260428 |
| API providers | 2 | 3 | 8 (best) |
| Released | Apr 2, 2026 | Apr 2, 2026 | Feb 14, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | 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.
- Gemma 4 E4B IT$1.40
- Step 3.5 Flash 2603$1.60
- Seed 2.0 Mini$0.891
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Gemma 4 E4B IT, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 or Seed 2.0 Mini?
Seed 2.0 Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Gemma 4 E4B IT (76) and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 (62). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 E4B IT, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 or Seed 2.0 Mini?
Seed 2.0 Mini is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.297 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). Gemma 4 E4B IT costs $0.11 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers); Step 3.5 Flash 2603 costs $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.097 per million tokens for Seed 2.0 Mini versus $0.12 for Gemma 4 E4B IT (1.2× as much) and $0.15 for Step 3.5 Flash 2603 (1.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Gemma 4 E4B IT has not been scored yet, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 has not been scored yet and Seed 2.0 Mini has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemma 4 E4B IT, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 and Seed 2.0 Mini 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?
Step 3.5 Flash 2603 and Seed 2.0 Mini have the largest context windows (256,000 and 256,000 tokens), against 131,072 for Gemma 4 E4B IT. Maximum output per response: Gemma 4 E4B IT up to 8,192, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 up to 256,000, Seed 2.0 Mini up to 32,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Gemma 4 E4B IT accepts text, images and audio; Step 3.5 Flash 2603 accepts text; Seed 2.0 Mini accepts text, images and video. Gemma 4 E4B IT handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Gemma 4 E4B IT and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Mini is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Gemma 4 E4B IT is the newest, released Apr 2, 2026. Step 3.5 Flash 2603 came out Apr 2, 2026; Seed 2.0 Mini came out Feb 14, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Step 3.5 Flash 2603 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.
