gemma4:31b
Checking current pricing…
Chat comparison
gemma4:31bvsllama-4-maverick
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
llama-4-maverick
Checking current pricing…
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
gemma4:31b
262,000 tokens
llama-4-maverickBetter fit
1,048,576 tokens
Input formats
gemma4:31b
text
llama-4-maverick
text, image
Vision
gemma4:31b
Not supported
llama-4-maverickBetter fit
Supported
JSON mode
gemma4:31bBetter fit
Supported
llama-4-maverick
Not supported
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
gemma4:31b
99.78%
llama-4-maverick
95.29%
Average response time
gemma4:31b
5,625.04 ms
llama-4-maverick
4,187.49 ms
P95 API latency
gemma4:31b
30,000 ms
llama-4-maverick
10,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
gemma4:31b: 100%llama-4-maverick: 100%
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
gemma4:31b: 6,970 msllama-4-maverick: 4,203 ms
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
gemma4:31b: 30,000 msllama-4-maverick: 10,000 ms
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Checking current pricing…
Checking current pricing…
Quick take
- llama-4-maverick has a larger context window.
- llama-4-maverick supports image input while the other model does not.
- gemma4:31b recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.
- llama-4-maverick recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.