Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Gemma 4 31B
73
1/8 categoriesGPT-5.1
78
Winner · 3/8 categoriesGemma 4 31B· GPT-5.1
Pick GPT-5.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 31B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
GPT-5.1 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 78 to 73. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.1's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 91.8 against 76.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is LiveCodeBench, 80% to 61%. Gemma 4 31B does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.50 input / $6.00 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. Gemma 4 31B gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for GPT-5.1.
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 | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | — | 78% |
| BrowseComp | — | 79% |
| OSWorld-Verified | — | 71% |
| CodingGemma 4 31B wins | ||
| LiveCodeBench | 80% | 61% |
| HumanEval | — | 89% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 68% |
| SWE-bench Pro | — | 71% |
| Multimodal & GroundedGPT-5.1 wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 76.9% | 94% |
| OfficeQA Pro | — | 89% |
| ReasoningGPT-5.1 wins | ||
| BBH | 74.4% | 92% |
| MRCRv2 | 66.4% | 84% |
| MuSR | — | 91% |
| LongBench v2 | — | 84% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 17.6% |
| KnowledgeGPT-5.1 wins | ||
| GPQA | 84.3% | 95% |
| MMLU-Pro | 85.2% | 83% |
| HLE | 26.5% | 27% |
| HLE w/o tools | 19.5% | — |
| MMLU | — | 97% |
| SuperGPQA | — | 93% |
| FrontierScience | — | 84% |
| SimpleQA | — | 93% |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | — | 89% |
| Multilingual | ||
| MGSM | — | 89% |
| MMLU-ProX | — | 87% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2023 | — | 99% |
| AIME 2024 | — | 99% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 98% |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | — | 95% |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | — | 97% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 96% |
| BRUMO 2025 | — | 96% |
| MATH-500 | — | 94% |
GPT-5.1 is ahead overall, 78 to 73. The biggest single separator in this matchup is LiveCodeBench, where the scores are 80% and 61%.
GPT-5.1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 74.2 versus 61.3. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemma 4 31B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 80 versus 66.5. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GPT-5.1 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 68.8 versus 66.4. Inside this category, BBH is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GPT-5.1 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 91.8 versus 76.9. 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.