Model comparison
Gemma 3 4B vs o1
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 525× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 4B scores higher in 0 categories and o1 in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where o1 leads 41.5 to 11.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 7.5% for Gemma 3 4B and 73.3% for o1.
- Gemma 3 4B is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- o1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 4B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 4B | o1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 28.1 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2024-09-12 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 200K |
| Max output | 4K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | $15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $60 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 35.9 (#215), o1: 46.1 (#70)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1230 | 1367 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 47.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 20.9 (#142), o1: 24.6 (#117)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 19.6% | — |
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |
Reasoning o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 13.2 (#335), o1: 27.9 (#111)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 15% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1253 | 1371 |
| DTBench | 50.9% | 74.7% |
| LMCA | 2.8% | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.02 | 141.91 |
| SimpleBench | — | 41.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 25.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 30.7% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |
Math o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 16.8 (#292), o1: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.5% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1239 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 14.7% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 9.3% |
Knowledge o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 11.8 (#299), o1: 41.5 (#110)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.2% | 76.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | 1361 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 11.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.4% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3 4B: —, o1: 34.2 (#93)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |
Multilingual o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 42.5 (#194), o1: 48.6 (#142)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1273 | 1358 |
| LMArena German | 1281 | 1337 |
| LMArena Russian | 1294 | 1356 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1394 |
| LMArena French | — | 1344 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1396 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1345 |
Instruction Following o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 65.2 (#225), o1: 74.8 (#86)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | 1367 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |
Long Context o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 38.7 (#194), o1: 50.3 (#9)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1273 | 1378 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference o1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 42.0 (#239), o1: 55.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1291 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1271 | 1348 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1255 | 1369 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 70.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1068 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 4B better than o1?
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 525× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 4B or o1?
Gemma 3 4B is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.
Is Gemma 3 4B or o1 better for coding?
o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
o1 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 4B and o1 share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 4B has 22 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.