Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Gemma 4 31B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

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

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.6 Flash unranked (Not scored); Gemma 4 31B #43 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemma 4 31B share 15 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Gemini 3.6 Flash; 14 to Gemma 4 31B.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
15
Gemini 3.6 Flash only
4
Gemma 4 31B only
14
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemma 4 31B is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is priced at $1.50 input / $7.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 31B. Gemini 3.6 Flash has 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 Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemma 4 31B
CategoryGemini 3.6 FlashΔGemma 4 31B
AgenticGemini 3.6 Flash83.0MarginNo overlapGemma 4 31BNot measured
CodingGemini 3.6 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 31B41.6
KnowledgeGemini 3.6 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 31B52.9
MultimodalGemini 3.6 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemma 4 31B76.9

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 4 31BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.6 Flash$1.5 input / $7.5 outputGemma 4 31B$0 input / $0 outputGemma 4 31B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.6 FlashNot availableGemma 4 31BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.6 FlashNot availableGemma 4 31BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.6 Flash1MGemma 4 31B256KGemini 3.6 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 4 31BResult
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 83%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1421804Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 38.7%14.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
GDPval-AASource 46.1%15.2%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA BriefcaseSource 961Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 24.5%15.1%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
aaTerminalBench21Source 77.5%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 59.9%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 35.26%Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 28.3%Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 37.3%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 36.4%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 4 31BResult
deepSweSource 49%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 69.2%43.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-SciCodeSource 52.7%43.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
SWE-RebenchSource 41.6%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 75.2%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 4 31BResult
AA-LCRSource 69.7%62.0%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
CritPtSource 10.6%1.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 4 31BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 50.1%29.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.8%85.7%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-HLESource 38.3%22.7%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 23.5%-45.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 50.2%19.9%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 53.5%81.6%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
GPQASource 84.3%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 85.2%Not comparable
HLESource 26.5%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 19.5%Not comparable
AA Openness IndexSource 38.9%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 4 31BResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 83.2%73.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
MMMU-ProSource 76.9%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 4 31BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 75.6%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemma 4 31B on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemma 4 31B today?

Gemini 3.6 Flash: $1.50 input / $7.50 output per 1M tokens Gemma 4 31B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Self-host vs API cost

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

Gemini 3.6 Flash
API / mo$6,750
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

Last updated: July 21, 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.