Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) vs Gemma 4 31B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 23 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
61.08/100
2 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) unranked (Not scored); Gemma 4 31B #43 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and Gemma 4 31B share 23 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 25 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max); 6 to Gemma 4 31B.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
23
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) only
25
Gemma 4 31B only
6
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) makes more sense if coding is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; Gemma 4 31B is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 23 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and Gemma 4 31B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 31B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 31B.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and Gemma 4 31B
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)ΔGemma 4 31B
CodingDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)70.9Margin← 29.3Gemma 4 31B41.6
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)60.1Margin← 7.2Gemma 4 31B52.9
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)74.5MarginNo overlapGemma 4 31BNot measured
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)95.2MarginNo overlapGemma 4 31BNot measured
MultimodalDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 31B76.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)B · Gemma 4 31B

  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 37.7%B 26.5%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 11.2
    HLE: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 37.7%; Gemma 4 31B scored 26.5%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark.

  2. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 90.1%B 84.3%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 5.8
    GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 90.1%; Gemma 4 31B scored 84.3%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark.

  3. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 87.5%B 85.2%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 2.3
    MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 87.5%; Gemma 4 31B scored 85.2%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)$0.435 input / $0.87 outputGemma 4 31B$0 input / $0 outputGemma 4 31B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not availableGemma 4 31BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not availableGemma 4 31BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)1MGemma 4 31B256KDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 67.9%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 83.4%—Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 48.2%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 73.6%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1307804DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
ToolathlonSource 51.8%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 36.4%14.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 24.3%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 96.2%59.9%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
GDPval-AASource 40.4%15.2%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA BriefcaseSource 932—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 40.4%28.3%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA Harvey LABSource 84.4%—Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 38.3%37.3%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA Tau3 BankingSource 25.8%15.1%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
terminalBenchHardSource 46.2%36.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
aaTerminalBench21Source 64%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource —35.26%Not comparable
CodingDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BResult
CodeforcesSource 3206.0—Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.6%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 55.4%—Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 76.2%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 67.9%—Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 49.93%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 59.4%43.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA-SciCodeSource 50.0%43.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
SWE-RebenchSource —41.6%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource —75.2%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BResult
MRCR 1MSource 83.5%—Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 62.0%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 66.3%62.0%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
CritPtSource 12.9%1.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BResult
MMLU-ProSource 87.5%85.2%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
SimpleQASource 57.9%—Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 84.4%—Not comparable
GPQASource 90.1%84.3%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
GPQA-DSource 90.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 37.7%26.5%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 44.3%29.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 88.8%85.7%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA-HLESource 35.9%22.7%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -10.0%-45.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.3%19.9%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 94.0%81.6%Gemma 4 31B leads
AA Openness IndexSource 50.0%38.9%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
HLE w/o toolsSource —19.5%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source 95.2%—Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 89.8%—Not comparable
ApexSource 38.3%—Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 90.2%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1264—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource —76.9%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —73.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Gemma 4 31BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 76.5%75.6%DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Gemma 4 31B?

DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and Gemma 4 31B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Gemma 4 31B?

DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.1 versus 52.9. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Gemma 4 31B?

DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.9 versus 41.6. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)
API / mo$979
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Gemma 4 31B
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$429
Break-even—
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Explore More

DeepSeek Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.