gemma4:31b
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
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
Capability scores
AI-estimated ratings on 30 criteria from head-to-head comparisons against 86 other text models in the LLM7 catalog, judged by TypeSafe Jev from public information (2026-10-20). Each score is the win rate against the field, relative to the strongest model for that criterion (100%). Not a benchmark.
gemma4:31b · leads in 6
34%
Weak
llama-4-maverick · leads in 22
40%
Weak
Knowledge & reasoning
General knowledge
gemma4:31b33%llama-4-maverickLeads60%Logical reasoning
gemma4:31b19%llama-4-maverickLeads26%Mathematics
gemma4:31b31%llama-4-maverickLeads36%Scientific and technical depth
gemma4:31b34%llama-4-maverickLeads45%Planning and task decomposition
gemma4:31b17%llama-4-maverickLeads25%
Coding & tools
Code generation
gemma4:31b33%llama-4-maverickLeads36%Debugging and code review
gemma4:31b29%llama-4-maverickLeads33%Agentic coding
gemma4:31b26%llama-4-maverickLeads34%Tool and function calling
gemma4:31b29%llama-4-maverickLeads36%SQL and query writing
gemma4:31b34%llama-4-maverick34%
Writing & language
Creative writing
gemma4:31b33%llama-4-maverickLeads48%Professional writing
gemma4:31b31%llama-4-maverickLeads39%Conversational quality
gemma4:31b23%llama-4-maverickLeads38%Multilingual ability
gemma4:31b44%llama-4-maverickLeads62%Translation
gemma4:31b32%llama-4-maverickLeads47%Summarization
gemma4:31b31%llama-4-maverickLeads57%
Data & professional work
Data analysis
gemma4:31b29%llama-4-maverickLeads38%Professional domains
gemma4:31b26%llama-4-maverickLeads41%Information extraction
gemma4:31bLeads35%llama-4-maverick27%Classification and labeling
gemma4:31b38%llama-4-maverickLeads49%Long-context handling
gemma4:31b39%llama-4-maverickLeads89%
Reliability & control
Instruction following
gemma4:31bLeads29%llama-4-maverick19%Structured output
gemma4:31bLeads46%llama-4-maverick7%Factual accuracy
gemma4:31b34%llama-4-maverickLeads44%Safety and alignment
gemma4:31b31%llama-4-maverickLeads41%Steerability
gemma4:31b28%llama-4-maverickLeads31%Output consistency
gemma4:31bLeads57%llama-4-maverick41%
Speed, cost & vision
Response speed
gemma4:31bLeads48%llama-4-maverick45%Cost efficiency
gemma4:31bLeads59%llama-4-maverick46%Image understanding
gemma4:31bNo image inputllama-4-maverick25%
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
gemma4:31b
99.73%
llama-4-maverick
95.34%
Average response time
gemma4:31b
6,204.99 ms
llama-4-maverick
4,496.14 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
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
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.