Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

Google: Gemma 4 31B vs Ling 3.0 Flash

Ling 3.0 Flash (high) leads on average score with 6.4 vs 6.3. Ling 3.0 Flash (high) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.000 vs $0.102. Ling 3.0 Flash (high) is faster at 13.32s vs 75.38s, with pass rates of 68.2% vs 63.6%.

Recommended modelLing 3.0 Flash (high)It has the best score here (6.4), while responding about 5.7x faster than Gemma 4 31B (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-24

Metric Gemma 4 31B Gemma 4 31B medium Release: 2026-04-02 Free Available Ling 3.0 Flash Ling 3.0 Flash high Release: 2026-07-24 Free Available
Score 6.3 6.4
Rank #117 #114
Reliability 10.0 9.4
Consistency 9.0 8.6
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 68.2% 63.6%
Flaky tests 2 4
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 1.044 0.000
Total Cost $0.102 $0.000
Input Price $0.120 / 1M $0.000 / 1M
Output Price $0.350 / 1M $0.000 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 94,992 132,224
Output Tokens 34,468 92,393
Reasoning Tokens 223,278 211,994
Response Time (avg) 75.38s 13.32s
Response Time (max) 437.40s 75.27s
Response Time (total) 1507.52s 292.99s

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#117 Gemma 4 31B

medium
Cost
$0.002
Time
45.7s
Tokens
2,696 tok

#114 Ling 3.0 Flash

high
Cost
$0.000
Time
30.7s
Tokens
10,576 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Gemma 4 31B 4.3 5.8 22.2% 1 219.76s 5,568 11,098 33,212
Ling 3.0 Flash 6.7 5.0 66.7% 2 14.85s 8,298 15,602 32,152

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair