# Claude Opus 4 vs Gemma 4 31B IT

> Claude Opus 4 and Gemma 4 31B IT score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.9 vs 43.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-vs-gemma-4-31b-it
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 25

## Summary

- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 5 categories and Gemma 4 31B IT in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multimodal, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 41.0 to 30.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 74.3% for Claude Opus 4 and 63.5% for Gemma 4 31B IT.
- Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.34 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
- Gemma 4 31B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
- Gemma 4 31B IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 43.2 |
| Rank | 93 | 85 |
| Context | 200K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $15 | $0.09 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $0.34 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4: 47.8 (#55)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.9 (#98)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 43.7% | 52.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1459 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1364 |
| SciCode | — | 43.4% |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 925.5 |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4: 34.5 (#39)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1127 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4: 27.4 (#104)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 26.4 (#119)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | 63.5% |
| CritPt | 0.3% | 1.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1448 |
| DTBench | 81.6% | 82.7% |
| LMCA | 37.4% | 39.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | 142.74 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 70.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 53% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 30.6% |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4: 40.2 (#80)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.3 (#72)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1391 | 1464 |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4: 43.9 (#82)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#141)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | 75.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1384 | 1465 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 10.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4: 30.9 (#101)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.0 (#32)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | 1278 |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |
| LMArena Document | — | 1425 |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4: 49.0 (#133)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 54.0 (#52)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1431 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1478 |
| LMArena French | 1370 | 1436 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1462 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1388 | 1443 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1332 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1318 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4: 77.3 (#26)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.6 (#58)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1433 |
| IFEval | 91.8% | — |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4: 39.5 (#167)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#67)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1446 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4: 61.4 (#85)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.7 (#92)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1443 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1386 | 1416 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | 1368 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1452 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
| WildBench | 85.2% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1120 |

## FAQ

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

Claude Opus 4 and Gemma 4 31B IT score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.9 vs 43.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or Gemma 4 31B IT?

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.34 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.

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

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 41.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Gemma 4 31B IT does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

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

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 4 31B IT has 35.