Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Carbon-X vs Gemma 4 E4B IT

Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against Carbon-X's 61 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3023 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Carbon-X C

Best for Agents that need a second opinion on DNA variants and regulatory regions on a 16 to 24 GB machine, without sending sequences to a hosted model.

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

Not clinically validated and no wet-lab validation reported

Gemma 4 E4B IT B

Best for Agents that need a cheap, permissively licensed helper on 8 GB of memory, for tool calls, short audio or images, rather than hard reasoning

Ahead on

  • Reach, 95 against 90
  • Risk, 70 against 65
  • Agent interface, 85 against 35

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 3.0 out of 5

Watch for

No safety evaluation figures published

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runCarbon-XGemma 4 E4B ITEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259095Gemma 4 E4B IT +5
Risk20%206570Gemma 4 E4B IT +5
Agent interface10%103585Gemma 4 E4B IT +50
Documentation and upkeep10%107775Carbon-X +2
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100B 63.2/100

Facts side by side

FactCarbon-XGemma 4 E4B IT
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorHugging Face (HuggingFaceBio)Google DeepMind
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2026-10-222026-07-20
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews3/5 (4)3.5/5 (4)

Verdicts

Carbon-X

A DNA specialist cousin that another agent calls for variant-effect and sequence questions, with DNA kept on the machine. Hugging Face's Q4_K_M GGUF needs about 12 GB and Q8_0 about 19 GB, on llama.cpp b11742 or later. It isn't clinically validated, it isn't trained for tool calls or reasoning, and the card contradicts its own GGUF repository on llama.cpp support.

Gemma 4 E4B IT

A small cousin for light agent work, tool-calling loops, transcription and image reading on a phone or laptop, under Apache 2.0. Google's 4-bit build needs about 7 GB with working space and runs in all the common runtimes. Google's card puts it far below larger Gemma 4 sizes on agent and coding tasks, with no published safety results.

Before you call either

Carbon-X

  1. Quickest start is llama-server -hf HuggingFaceBio/Carbon-X-GGUF:Q8_0 -ngl 99 -c 40960 --jinja --chat-template-kwargs '{"enable_thinking": false}' --temp 0.6 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 --min-p 0, on llama.cpp b11742 or later
  2. With vLLM or Transformers pass trust_remote_code, and expect the tokenizer to fetch Qwen/Qwen3-4B-Base at a pinned revision on first load
  3. Keep enable_thinking false and the card's sampling (temperature 0.6, top_p 0.95, top_k 20), the settings every reported result used
  4. Keep DNA in files and pass sequences by name, compute positions and base changes in code and send them as context, the card says the model miscounts long sequences
  5. Only A, C, G and T form 6-mers, so filter N and other IUPAC codes first or they become a single oov token
  6. Strip the dna tags from answers if you need bare sequence, llama.cpp keeps them in the text
  7. Cap max_tokens for next-base questions, long DNA generation is slow and degrades

Gemma 4 E4B IT

  1. On the reference machine run llama-server -hf google/gemma-4-E4B-it-qat-q4_0-gguf --hf-file gemma-4-E4B_q4_0-it.gguf --jinja -c 131072, and add --mmproj with gemma-4-E4B-it-mmproj.gguf for images and audio
  2. With Ollama run ollama run gemma4:e4b and raise num_ctx or OLLAMA_CONTEXT_LENGTH, since the default context is small and agents want at least 64K
  3. In vLLM or SGLang pass --tool-call-parser gemma4 --reasoning-parser gemma4 (vLLM also --enable-auto-tool-choice), or tool calls come back as text; Google's w4a16 build is the 4-bit route there
  4. Thinking is off by default; pass enable_thinking=True or start the system prompt with <|think|>, and drop earlier turns' thinking from history except on tool-call turns
  5. Put images before the text and audio after it, keep audio to 30 seconds and video to 60 frames, and validate tool names and arguments before running them

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Carbon-X or Gemma 4 E4B IT?

Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against Carbon-X's 61 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories.

Other comparisons with Carbon-X or Gemma 4 E4B IT

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.