Seed 2.0 Code vs Gemma 4 26B A4B
At a Glance
| Compare | Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed |  Gemma 4 26B A4BGoogle DeepMind |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.50Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $0.070Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $3.00Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $0.30Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | Not reported | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Seed 2.0 Code | Gemma 4 26B-A4B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | ByteDance Seed | Google DeepMind |
| Family | Seed 2 0 | Gemma 4 |
| Model | Seed 2.0 Code | Gemma 4 26B-A4B |
| Version | Seed 2.0 Code | Gemma 4 26B-A4B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2026-03-11 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | Unknown | 262K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 26B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 4B |
| License | Unknown | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Openrouter (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | agents, chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
Seed 2.0 Code Capabilities
Gemma 4 26B A4B Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs | Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | family variantstext |
Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Seed 2.0 Code vs Gemma 4 26B A4B FAQs
Is Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Seed 2.0 Code and Gemma 4 26B A4B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+
Seed 2.0 Code is $0.50 and Gemma 4 26B A4B is $0.070 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper on this metric. Seed 2.0 Code is $3.00 and Gemma 4 26B A4B is $0.30 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Seed 2.0 Code is — and Gemma 4 26B A4B is 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B be self-hosted?+
Gemma 4 26B A4B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Seed 2.0 Code is not marked open weight; Gemma 4 26B A4B is open weight.
Can Seed 2.0 Code and Gemma 4 26B A4B understand images?+
Seed 2.0 Code is not documented with image input; Gemma 4 26B A4B is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Seed 2.0 Code is — and Gemma 4 26B A4B is —.
Do Seed 2.0 Code and Gemma 4 26B A4B support reasoning and tool use?+
Seed 2.0 Code: reasoning and tool calling. Gemma 4 26B A4B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+
Seed 2.0 Code has 1 sourced provider route; Gemma 4 26B A4B has 4, so Gemma 4 26B A4B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Seed 2.0 Code or Gemma 4 26B A4B?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.