LFM2 24B A2B vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT comes out ahead, 75 to 58 on our weighted score, though LFM2 24B A2B is 30% cheaper per token.
Liquid AILFM2 24B A2B
58/100- ECI—
- Price$0.03 / $0.12
- Context33K
- Our pick
GoogleDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
75/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.15
- Context262K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT is our pick
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 75/100 against LFM2 24B A2B (58). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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 priceLFM2 24B A2BLFM2 24B A2B $0.052 · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT $0.075 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextDiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT 262,144 · LFM2 24B A2B 32,768 tokens
- Widest inputsDiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITLFM2 24B A2B: Text · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | LFM2 24B A2B | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 99 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 60 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 58/100 | 75/100 |
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 | LFM2 24B A2BLiquid AI | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.03 (best) | $0.05 |
| Output | $0.12 (best) | $0.15 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.052 (best) | $0.075 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 32,768 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenLFM Open License v1.0 | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 1 | 2 (best) |
| Released | Feb 24, 2026 | Jun 9, 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.
- LFM2 24B A2B$0.54
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT$0.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: LFM2 24B A2B or DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 75/100 against LFM2 24B A2B (58). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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, LFM2 24B A2B or DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT?
LFM2 24B A2B is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.12 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT costs $0.05 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.052 per million tokens for LFM2 24B A2B versus $0.075 for DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. LFM2 24B A2B has not been scored yet and DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for LFM2 24B A2B and DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 32,768 for LFM2 24B A2B. Maximum output per response: LFM2 24B A2B up to 32,768, DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
LFM2 24B A2B accepts text; DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT accepts text and images. DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (LFM Open License v1.0 and Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT is the newest, released Jun 9, 2026. LFM2 24B A2B came out Feb 24, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT 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 Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3.5 4BThree-way comparison
- LFM2 24B A2B vs Qwen3.5 4BAlibaba (Qwen)
- LFM2 24B A2B vs Gemma 4 E2B ITGoogle
- LFM2 24B A2B vs Schematron V2 TurboInference.net
- LFM2 24B A2B vs AutoGLM Phone 9B MultilingualZ.ai (Zhipu)
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Hy-MT2-1.8BTencent
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling 3.0 FlashinclusionAI
