| Signal | Gemma 4 31B | Delta | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | -33 | |
Pricing | 0 | -15 | |
Context window size | 86 | -10 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 85 | +0 | |
Benchmarks | 0 | -90 | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 6 | 4 wins |
0
days higher
0
days
30
days higher
OpenAI
Gemma 4 31B saves you $966.00/month
That's $11592.00/year compared to GPT-5.4 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 91 | GPT-5.4 |
| Rank | #118 | #2 | GPT-5.4 |
| Quality Rank | #118 | #2 | GPT-5.4 |
| Adoption Rank | #118 | #2 | GPT-5.4 |
| Parameters | 31B | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 262K | 1050K | GPT-5.4 |
| Pricing | $0.14/$0.40/M | $2.50/$15.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 100 | GPT-5.4 |
| Pricing | 0 | 15 | GPT-5.4 |
| Context window size | 86 | 96 | GPT-5.4 |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 85 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Benchmarks | -- | 90 | GPT-5.4 |
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 40/100 (rank #118), placing it in the top 60% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 91/100 (rank #2), placing it in the top 100% of all 290 models tracked.
GPT-5.4 has a 51-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Gemma 4 31B offers 97% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $8.10/month with Gemma 4 31B vs $262.50/month with GPT-5.4 - a $254.40 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 (1050K 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 (91/100) 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
GPT-5.4 clearly outperforms Gemma 4 31B with a significant 51-point lead. For most general use cases, GPT-5.4 is the stronger choice. However, Gemma 4 31B may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
Gemma 4 31B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Gemma 4 31B
97% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Gemma 4 31B
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Gemma 4 31B
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Gemma 4 31B
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Google
| Capability | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
Gemma 4 31B saves you $21.77/month
That's 97% cheaper than GPT-5.4 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 | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 262K | 1.1M |
| Max Output Tokens | 131,072 | 128,000 |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Created | Apr 2, 2026 | Mar 5, 2026 |
GPT-5.4 scores 91/100 (rank #2) compared to Gemma 4 31B's 40/100 (rank #118), giving it a 51-point advantage. GPT-5.4 is the stronger overall choice, though Gemma 4 31B may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Gemma 4 31B is ranked #118 and GPT-5.4 is ranked #2 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 GPT-5.4's $15.00/M output tokens - 37.5x more expensive. Input token pricing: Gemma 4 31B at $0.14/M vs GPT-5.4 at $2.50/M.
GPT-5.4 has a larger context window of 1,050,000 tokens compared to Gemma 4 31B's 262,144 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.