| Signal | ALLaM 34B | Delta | Gemma 4 31B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 17 | -67 | |
Pricing | 100 | +0 | |
Context window size | 57 | -29 | |
Recency | 91 | -9 | |
Output Capacity | 60 | -25 | |
Benchmarks | 0 | -86 | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 6 | 5 wins |
Score History
40
current score
Gemma 4 31B
right now
80.5
current score
HUMAIN
ALLaM 34B saves you $34.00/month
That's $408.00/year compared to Gemma 4 31B at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | ALLaM 34B | Gemma 4 31B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 81 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Rank | #295 | #35 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Quality Rank | #295 | #35 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Adoption Rank | #295 | #35 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Parameters | 34B | 31B | -- |
| Context Window | 4K | 262K | Gemma 4 31B |
| Pricing | Free | $0.14/$0.40/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 17 | 83 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Pricing | 100 | 100 | ALLaM 34B |
| Context window size | 57 | 86 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Recency | 91 | 100 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Output Capacity | 60 | 85 | Gemma 4 31B |
| Benchmarks | -- | 86 | 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%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 40/100 (rank #295), placing it in the top -1% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 81/100 (rank #35), placing it in the top 88% of all 290 models tracked.
Gemma 4 31B has a 41-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Compare the cost per quality point to find the best value for your specific workload.
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. ALLaM 34B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (262K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (81/100) 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
Gemma 4 31B clearly outperforms ALLaM 34B with a significant 40.5-point lead. For most general use cases, Gemma 4 31B is the stronger choice. However, ALLaM 34B may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
ALLaM 34B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
ALLaM 34B
100% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
ALLaM 34B
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
ALLaM 34B
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
ALLaM 34B
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by HUMAIN
| Capability | ALLaM 34B | Gemma 4 31B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoningdiffers | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
HUMAIN
ALLaM 34B saves you $0.7320/month
That's 100% cheaper than Gemma 4 31B 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 | ALLaM 34B | Gemma 4 31B |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 4K | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | 4,096 | 131,072 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Aug 25, 2025 | Apr 2, 2026 |