Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hunyuan T1 20250711

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 4 31B IT Google

43.5

Rank #90 Confirmed

Hunyuan T1 20250711 Tencent

42.5

Rank #114 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher in 6 categories and Hunyuan T1 20250711 in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 43.2 to 38.7.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
ProviderGoogleTencent
Noometry Index43.542.5
Released2026-04-02—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window262K—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.09—
Output $ / M tokens$0.34—
Results tracked3513

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: 42.3 (#108), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 40.9 (#129)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Coding14591390
LMArena WebDev1366—
SciCode43.4%—
WeirdML52.3%—
ALE-Bench925.5—

Reasoning Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 27.2 (#122), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 28.5 (#103)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Hard Prompts14481399
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 Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 43.2 (#81), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.7 (#130)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Math14651414
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.3%—

Knowledge Too close to call

Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#151), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.8 (#141)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Expert14651395
GPQA Diamond75.8%—
SimpleQA Verified10.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.6 (#34), Hunyuan T1 20250711: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Vision1277—
LMArena Document1425—

Multilingual Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 53.8 (#57), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 51.2 (#112)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Non-English14311395
LMArena Chinese14761425
LMArena Russian14601385
LMArena French1435—
LMArena Korean—1406
LMArena Spanish1444—

Instruction Following Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.5 (#61), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 72.6 (#138)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Instruction Following14331374

Long Context Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#71), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 42.2 (#128)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Longer Query14461384

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.5 (#96), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 59.5 (#109)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITHunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Text14431401
LMArena Creative Writing14151392
LMArena Multi-Turn14521393
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1368—
EQ-Bench 41120—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 31B IT better than Hunyuan T1 20250711?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 4 31B IT or Hunyuan T1 20250711 better for coding?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 31B IT and Hunyuan T1 20250711 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 31B IT has 35 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan T1 20250711 has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper