Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Phi-4 Mini

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 4 31B IT Google

43.5

Rank #90 Confirmed

Phi-4 Mini Microsoft

30.9

Rank #283 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher in 3 categories and Phi-4 Mini in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 42.3 to 28.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 43.4% for Gemma 4 31B IT and 10.8% for Phi-4 Mini.
  • Phi-4 Mini is cheaper at $0.075 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.09 / $0.34 for Gemma 4 31B IT.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Gemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
ProviderGoogleMicrosoft
Noometry Index43.530.9
Released2026-04-022024-12-11
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K128K
Max output33K4K
Input $ / M tokens$0.09$0.075
Output $ / M tokens$0.34$0.30
Results tracked353

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), Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
SciCode43.4%10.8%
LMArena WebDev1366—
WeirdML52.3%—
LMArena Coding1459—
ALE-Bench925.5—

Reasoning Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 27.2 (#122), Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
CritPt1.4%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)70.6%—
Chess Puzzles5%—
Thematic Generalization53%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1448—
DTBench82.7%—
LMCA39.3%—
Surface Evolver Bench30.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index142.74—

Math Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 43.2 (#81), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.3%—
LMArena Math1465—

Knowledge Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#151), Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%23.5%
GPQA Diamond75.8%—
SimpleQA Verified10.4%—
LMArena Expert1465—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.6 (#34), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
LMArena Vision1277—
LMArena Document1425—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 53.8 (#57), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
LMArena Non-English1431—
LMArena Chinese1476—
LMArena French1435—
LMArena Russian1460—
LMArena Spanish1444—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.5 (#61), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
LMArena Instruction Following1433—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#71), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
LMArena Longer Query1446—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.5 (#96), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITPhi-4 Mini
LMArena Text1443—
LMArena Creative Writing1415—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1368—
EQ-Bench 41120—
LMArena Multi-Turn1452—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 31B IT better than Phi-4 Mini?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B IT or Phi-4 Mini?

Phi-4 Mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Gemma 4 31B IT lists at $0.09 and $0.34.

Is Gemma 4 31B IT or Phi-4 Mini better for coding?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 28.1 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 Phi-4 Mini share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 31B IT has 35 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 Mini has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper