# DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemma 4 31B IT

> DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 43.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 31B IT costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-pro-vs-gemma-4-31b-it
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 32

## Summary

- They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 4 31B IT in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Pro leads 56.4 to 26.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 52.9% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 10.4% for Gemma 4 31B IT.
- Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.34 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for DeepSeek V4 Pro.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Google |
| Noometry Index | 54.2 | 43.2 |
| Rank | 28 | 85 |
| Context | 1M | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | $0.09 |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | $0.34 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 52.2 (#31)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.9 (#98)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1582 | 1364 |
| SciCode | 51% | 43.4% |
| WeirdML | 66.2% | 52.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1470 | 1459 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,403 | 925.5 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 77.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 28.6% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 32.7 (#54)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 47.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,285 | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 56.4 (#22)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 26.4 (#119)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.5% | 63.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.3% | 70.6% |
| CritPt | 18% | 1.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1448 |
| DTBench | 93.9% | 82.7% |
| LMCA | 45.5% | 39.3% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 40% | 30.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.39 | 142.74 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 53% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.1 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 64.6 (#24)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.3 (#72)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.6% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1464 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 64.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 59.5 (#28)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#141)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | 75.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.9% | 10.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.6% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1463 | 1465 |

## Multimodal

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: —
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.0 (#32)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1278 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1425 |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 54.5 (#44)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 54.0 (#52)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1431 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1486 | 1478 |
| LMArena French | 1473 | 1436 |
| LMArena Russian | 1452 | 1462 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | 1443 |
| LMArena German | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1452 | — |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 76.3 (#44)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.6 (#58)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1448 | 1433 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 45.0 (#49)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#67)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1459 | 1446 |
| CL-bench Life | 13.5% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 65.6 (#45)
- Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.7 (#92)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 4 31B IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1443 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1446 | 1416 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1553 | 1368 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1166 | 1120 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | 1452 |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemma 4 31B IT?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 43.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 31B IT costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro 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; DeepSeek V4 Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemma 4 31B IT better for coding?

DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 41.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4 Pro does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemma 4 31B IT share?

32 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Pro has 48 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 4 31B IT has 35.