Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.6 27B

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 4 31B IT Google

43.5

Rank #90 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.2

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 2 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 37.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.3% for Gemma 4 31B IT and 91.1% for Qwen3.6 27B.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.34 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.

Side by side

Gemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.542.2
Released2026-04-022026-04-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K262K
Max output33K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.09$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$0.34$3.60
Results tracked3511

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), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
SciCode43.4%37.3%
LMArena WebDev1366—
WeirdML52.3%—
LMArena Coding1459—
ALE-Bench925.5—

Reasoning Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 27.2 (#122), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
CritPt1.4%0.9%
Chess Puzzles5%22%
DTBench82.7%78.1%
LMCA39.3%34.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index142.74146.5
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)70.6%—
Thematic Generalization53%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1448—
Mystery Game Puzzles—7%
Surface Evolver Bench30.6%—

Math Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 43.2 (#81), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.3%91.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—35.1%
LMArena Math1465—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#151), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond75.8%85.9%
SimpleQA Verified10.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—
LMArena Expert1465—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.6 (#34), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Vision1277—
LMArena Document1425—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 53.8 (#57), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Non-English1431—
LMArena Chinese1476—
LMArena French1435—
LMArena Russian1460—
LMArena Spanish1444—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.5 (#61), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Instruction Following1433—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#71), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Longer Query1446—

Writing & Preference Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.5 (#96), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.6 27B
EQ-Bench 411201026
LMArena Text1443—
LMArena Creative Writing1415—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1368—
LMArena Multi-Turn1452—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 31B IT better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B IT or Qwen3.6 27B?

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.34 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.

Is Gemma 4 31B IT or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 31B IT and Qwen3.6 27B share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 31B IT has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper