Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.6V

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 4 31B IT Google

43.2

Rank #85 Confirmed

GLM-4.6V Z.ai (Zhipu)

40.9

Rank #133 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-4.6V in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multimodal, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 41.0 to 34.2.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.34 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Gemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index43.240.9
Released2026-04-022025-12-08
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K128K
Max output33K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.09$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$0.34$0.90
Results tracked3512

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.9 (#98), GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Coding14591390
LMArena WebDev1364—
SciCode43.4%—
WeirdML52.3%—
ALE-Bench925.5—

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemma 4 31B IT: 26.4 (#119), GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Hard Prompts14481368
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)70.6%—
CritPt1.4%—
Chess Puzzles5%—
Thematic Generalization53%—
DTBench82.7%—
LMCA39.3%—
Surface Evolver Bench30.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index142.74—

Math Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.3 (#72), GLM-4.6V: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.3%—
LMArena Math1464—

Knowledge Too close to call

Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#141), GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Expert14651372
GPQA Diamond75.8%—
SimpleQA Verified10.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—

Multimodal Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.0 (#32), GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Vision12781164
LMArena Document1425—

Multilingual Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 54.0 (#52), GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Non-English14311359
LMArena Chinese14781426
LMArena Russian14621341
LMArena French1436—
LMArena Spanish1443—

Instruction Following Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.6 (#58), GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Instruction Following14331351

Long Context Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#67), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Longer Query14461358

Writing & Preference Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.7 (#92), GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.6V
LMArena Text14431377
LMArena Creative Writing14161347
LMArena Multi-Turn14521359
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1368—
EQ-Bench 41120—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 31B IT better than GLM-4.6V?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B IT or GLM-4.6V?

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.34 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

Is Gemma 4 31B IT or GLM-4.6V better for coding?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 40.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemma 4 31B IT does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 31B IT and GLM-4.6V share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 31B IT has 35 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper