Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 4 31B IT
Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and Gemma 4 31B IT in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multimodal, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 41.6 to 29.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 40.5% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 63.5% for Gemma 4 31B IT.
- Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.34 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.40 for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- Gemma 4 31B IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ||
| Noometry Index | 37.0 | 43.5 |
| Released | 2025-06-17 | 2026-04-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 66K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.09 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $0.34 |
| Results tracked | 33 | 35 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), Gemma 4 31B IT: 42.3 (#108)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 35.2% | 52.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1373 | 1459 |
| ALE-Bench | 325.9 | 925.5 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1366 |
| SciCode | — | 43.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), Gemma 4 31B IT: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 36.9% | — |
Reasoning Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), Gemma 4 31B IT: 27.2 (#122)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | 63.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1377 | 1448 |
| DTBench | 62.8% | 82.7% |
| LMCA | 18.1% | 39.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.94 | 142.74 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 70.6% |
| CritPt | — | 1.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 53% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 30.6% |
Math Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), Gemma 4 31B IT: 43.2 (#81)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1373 | 1465 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 73.3% |
| Omni-MATH | 48% | — |
Knowledge Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.3% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1373 | 1465 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 75.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 10.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 53.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.9% | — |
Multimodal Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.6 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1198 | 1277 |
| VPCT | 30% | — |
| LMArena Document | — | 1425 |
Multilingual Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), Gemma 4 31B IT: 53.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1369 | 1431 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1404 | 1476 |
| LMArena French | 1388 | 1435 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1460 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | 1444 |
| LMArena German | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | — |
Instruction Following Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.5 (#61)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | 1433 |
| IFEval | 81% | — |
Long Context Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#71)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1446 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 47.2% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemma 4 31B IT leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.5 (#96)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1379 | 1443 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1367 | 1415 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1366 | 1452 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1368 |
| WildBench | 81.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1120 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Gemma 4 31B IT?
Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Gemma 4 31B IT?
Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.34 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite lists at $0.10 and $0.40.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Gemma 4 31B IT better for coding?
Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemma 4 31B IT share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 4 31B IT has 35.