Gemma 4 31B vs Ornith-1.0-397B
Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Verdict
Ornith-1.0-397B leads for most workloads.
Based on BenchLM composite scores, July 2026.
Gemma 4 31B
61
Ornith-1.0-397B
73
Pick Ornith-1.0-397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 31B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Category Radar
Head-to-Head by Category
Category Breakdown
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 31B | Δ | Ornith-1.0-397B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 41.6 | → 28.1 | 69.7 |
| Agentic | — | — | 77.5 |
| Knowledge | 53.3 | — | — |
| Multimodal | 76.9 | — | — |
Operational Comparison
Gemma 4 31B
Ornith-1.0-397B
$0 / $0
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
256K
256K
Quick Verdict
Pick Ornith-1.0-397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 31B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Ornith-1.0-397B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 73 to 61. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Ornith-1.0-397B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 69.7 against 41.6.
Benchmark Deep Dive
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemma 4 31B or Ornith-1.0-397B?
Ornith-1.0-397B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 73 to 61.
Which is better for coding, Gemma 4 31B or Ornith-1.0-397B?
Ornith-1.0-397B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 69.7 versus 41.6. Gemma 4 31B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.