Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Gemini 1.5 Pro
50
0/8 categoriesGemma 4 31B
73
Winner · 3/8 categoriesGemini 1.5 Pro· Gemma 4 31B
Pick Gemma 4 31B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 1.5 Pro only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 2M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Gemma 4 31B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 73 to 50. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemma 4 31B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 80 against 16.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is LiveCodeBench, 22% to 80%.
Gemma 4 31B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 1.5 Pro is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemini 1.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 31B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro | Gemma 4 31B |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 45% | — |
| BrowseComp | 64% | — |
| CodingGemma 4 31B wins | ||
| HumanEval | 56% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | 5% | — |
| LiveCodeBench | 22% | 80% |
| SWE-bench Pro | 18% | — |
| Multimodal & GroundedGemma 4 31B wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 75% | 76.9% |
| OfficeQA Pro | 73% | — |
| VideoMMMU | 53.9% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| BBH | 74% | 74.4% |
| MRCRv2 | — | 66.4% |
| KnowledgeGemma 4 31B wins | ||
| MMLU | 64% | — |
| GPQA | 56.8% | 84.3% |
| SuperGPQA | 62% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 57% | 85.2% |
| SimpleQA | 62% | — |
| HLE | — | 26.5% |
| HLE w/o tools | — | 19.5% |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | 77% | — |
| Multilingual | ||
| MGSM | 76% | — |
| MMLU-ProX | 66% | — |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2024 | 66% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 65% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 60% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 62% | — |
| MATH-500 | 73% | — |
Gemma 4 31B is ahead overall, 73 to 50. The biggest single separator in this matchup is LiveCodeBench, where the scores are 22% and 80%.
Gemma 4 31B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 61.3 versus 59.1. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemma 4 31B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 80 versus 16.5. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemma 4 31B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.9 versus 74.1. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.