Model comparison
Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.4 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 31B #43 (Supported); GPT-5.4 Pro #44 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.4 Pro share 4 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 25 results are unique to Gemma 4 31B; 8 to GPT-5.4 Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 4
- Gemma 4 31B only
- 25
- GPT-5.4 Pro only
- 8
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Gemma 4 31B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 Pro only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you need the larger 1.05M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Gemma 4 31B has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 61.08 versus 60.89. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
GPT-5.4 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $30.00 input / $180.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 31B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 31B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Gemma 4 31B | Δ | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 31B76.9 | Margin→ 17.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro94.0 |
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 31B52.9 | Margin→ 5.8 | GPT-5.4 Pro58.7 |
| Agentic | Gemma 4 31BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 Pro89.3 |
| Coding | Gemma 4 31B41.6 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 ProNot measured |
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 31BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 Pro83.3 |
| Math | Gemma 4 31BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 Pro46.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 26.5%B 58.7%Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 32.2HLE: Gemma 4 31B scored 26.5%; GPT-5.4 Pro scored 58.7%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 76.9%B 94%Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 17.1MMMU-Pro: Gemma 4 31B scored 76.9%; GPT-5.4 Pro scored 94%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 31B$0 input / $0 output | GPT-5.4 Pro$30 input / $180 output | Gemma 4 31B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 31BNot available | GPT-5.4 Pro74 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 31BNot available | GPT-5.4 Pro151.79 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 31B256K | GPT-5.4 Pro1.05M | GPT-5.4 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 14.4% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 59.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 15.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 804 | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 35.26% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 28.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 37.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 15.1% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 36.4% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 89.3% | Not comparable |
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.4 Pro wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 84.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 26.5% | 58.7% | GPT-5.4 Pro leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 19.5% | 42.7% | GPT-5.4 Pro leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 29.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 85.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 22.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -45.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 19.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 81.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 38.9% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierScienceSource | — | 36.7% | Not comparable |
| FrontierScience ResearchSource | — | 36.7% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
MultimodalGPT-5.4 Pro wins2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 75.6% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.4 Pro?
Gemma 4 31B is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 61.08 to 60.89. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 26.5% and 58.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.4 Pro?
GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.7 versus 52.9. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.4 Pro?
GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 94 versus 76.9. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.