| Signal | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview | Delta | Gemma 4 31B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 83 | +17 | |
Benchmarks | 72 | +72 | |
Pricing | 2 | +1 | |
Context window size | 96 | +10 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 80 | -5 | |
| Overall Result | 4 wins | of 6 | 1 wins |
30
days higher
0
days
0
days higher
Gemma 4 31B saves you $66.00/month
That's $792.00/year compared to Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview | Gemma 4 31B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 74 | 40 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Rank | #50 | #118 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Quality Rank | #50 | #118 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Adoption Rank | #50 | #118 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Parameters | -- | 31B | -- |
| Context Window | 1049K | 262K | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Pricing | $0.25/$1.50/M | $0.14/$0.40/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 83 | 67 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Benchmarks | 72 | -- | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Pricing | 2 | 0 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Context window size | 96 | 86 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Output Capacity | 80 | 85 | Gemma 4 31B |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 74/100 (rank #50), placing it in the top 83% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #118), placing it in the top 60% of all 290 models tracked.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview has a 34-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Gemma 4 31B offers 69% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $8.10/month with Gemma 4 31B vs $26.25/month with Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview - a $18.15 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Gemma 4 31B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.40/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (74/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview clearly outperforms Gemma 4 31B with a significant 33.5-point lead. For most general use cases, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is the stronger choice. However, Gemma 4 31B may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Gemma 4 31B
69% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Google
| Capability | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview | Gemma 4 31B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Gemma 4 31B saves you $1.52/month
That's 67% cheaper than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview | Gemma 4 31B |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1.0M | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | 65,536 | 131,072 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Mar 3, 2026 | Apr 2, 2026 |
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview scores 74/100 (rank #50) compared to Gemma 4 31B's 40/100 (rank #118), giving it a 34-point advantage. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is the stronger overall choice, though Gemma 4 31B may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is ranked #50 and Gemma 4 31B is ranked #118 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Gemma 4 31B is cheaper at $0.40/M output tokens vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview's $1.50/M output tokens - 3.8x more expensive. Input token pricing: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview at $0.25/M vs Gemma 4 31B at $0.14/M.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview has a larger context window of 1,048,576 tokens compared to Gemma 4 31B's 262,144 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.