# Claude 2.1 vs Gemma 4 31B IT

> Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-2-1-vs-gemma-4-31b-it
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 5

## Summary

- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Gemma 4 31B IT in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 41.3 to 9.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 73.3% for Gemma 4 31B IT.
- Gemma 4 31B IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 43.2 |
| Rank | 340 | 85 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.09 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.34 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude 2.1: 25.8 (#322)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.9 (#98)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 7.1% | 52.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1364 |
| SciCode | — | 43.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1459 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 925.5 |

## Reasoning

- Claude 2.1: 20.6 (#216)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 26.4 (#119)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51% | 82.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.22 | 142.74 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 70.6% |
| CritPt | — | 1.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 53% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1448 |
| LMCA | — | 39.3% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 30.6% |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |

## Math

- Claude 2.1: 9.6 (#309)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.3 (#72)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1464 |

## Knowledge

- Claude 2.1: 15.5 (#287)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#141)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 75.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 10.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1465 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude 2.1: —
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.0 (#32)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1278 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1425 |

## Multilingual

- Claude 2.1: —
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 54.0 (#52)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1431 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1478 |
| LMArena French | — | 1436 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1462 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1443 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 2.1: —
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.6 (#58)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1433 |

## Long Context

- Claude 2.1: —
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#67)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1446 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 2.1: —
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.7 (#92)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1443 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1416 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1368 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1120 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1452 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 2.1 better than Gemma 4 31B IT?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 2.1 or Gemma 4 31B IT better for coding?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 25.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Gemma 4 31B IT share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 4 31B IT has 35.