Schematron V2 Turbo vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT comes out ahead, 75 to 55 on our weighted score, though Schematron V2 Turbo is 20% cheaper per token.
Inference.net
Schematron V2 Turbo
55/100- ECI—
- Price$0.03 / $0.15
- Context128K
- 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 Schematron V2 Turbo (55). 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 priceSchematron V2 TurboSchematron V2 Turbo $0.06 · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT $0.075 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextDiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITDiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT 262,144 · Schematron V2 Turbo 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsDiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITSchematron V2 Turbo: Text · DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT: Text, Images
- Self-hostingDiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Schematron V2 Turbo | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 99 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 0 | 60 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 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 | Schematron V2 TurboInference.net | DiffusionGemma 26B A4B ITGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.03 (best) | $0.05 |
| Output | $0.15 | $0.15 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.06 (best) | $0.075 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 5 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 5 (best) | 2 |
| Released | Apr 16, 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.
- Schematron V2 Turbo$0.60
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT$0.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Schematron V2 Turbo or DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 75/100 against Schematron V2 Turbo (55). 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, Schematron V2 Turbo or DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT?
Schematron V2 Turbo is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). 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 $0.06 per million tokens for Schematron V2 Turbo versus $0.075 for DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Schematron V2 Turbo 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 Schematron V2 Turbo and DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Schematron V2 Turbo does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 128,000 for Schematron V2 Turbo. Maximum output per response: Schematron V2 Turbo up to 8,192, DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Schematron V2 Turbo 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?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Schematron V2 Turbo is proprietary.
Which is newer?
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT is the newest, released Jun 9, 2026. Schematron V2 Turbo came out Apr 16, 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 Gemma 4 E2B ITThree-way comparison
- Schematron V2 Turbo vs Gemma 4 E2B ITGoogle
- Schematron V2 Turbo vs LFM2 24B A2BLiquid AI
- Schematron V2 Turbo vs Hy-MT2-1.8BTencent
- Schematron V2 Turbo vs Qwen3.5 4BAlibaba (Qwen)
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Hy-MT2-1.8BTencent
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling 3.0 FlashinclusionAI
