Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Gemma 4 31B
73
Winner · 1/8 categoriesK-Exaone
~50
0/8 categoriesGemma 4 31B· K-Exaone
Pick Gemma 4 31B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. K-Exaone only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
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 49.4.
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 | K-Exaone |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| CodingGemma 4 31B wins | ||
| LiveCodeBench | 80% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 49.4% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 76.9% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| BBH | 74.4% | — |
| MRCRv2 | 66.4% | — |
| Knowledge | ||
| GPQA | 84.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 85.2% | — |
| HLE | 26.5% | — |
| HLE w/o tools | 19.5% | — |
| Instruction Following | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| Multilingual | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| Mathematics | ||
| Coming soon | ||
Gemma 4 31B is ahead overall, 73 to 50.
Gemma 4 31B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 80 versus 49.4. K-Exaone stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.