Navigate
Advertise here

Gemma 4 31B vs Qwen3.6 Flash

The average score is effectively tied at 6.1 vs 6.1. Gemma 4 31B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.016 vs $0.062. Qwen3.6 Flash is faster at 3.73s vs 5.41s, with pass rates of 43.9% vs 34.9%.

Last updated at: 2026-09-08

Compared models

Rank
#201
Total Output Tokens
13,317
Response Time (avg)
5.41s
Total Cost
$0.016
Rank
#200
Total Output Tokens
30,947
Response Time (avg)
3.73s
Total Cost
$0.062
Recommended model Qwen3.6 Flash

It has the strongest score in this comparison (6.1) and the best overall balance of cost and response time across all 2 models.

Detailed comparison

Metric Gemma 4 31B Gemma 4 31B none Release: 2026-04-02 Free Available Qwen3.6 Flash Qwen3.6 Flash none Release: 2026-04-20
Score 6.1 6.1
Rank #201 #200
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.6 9.6
Attempts 66/66 66/66
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 43.9% 34.9%
Flaky tests 1 1
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.366 0.935
Total Cost $0.016 $0.062
Input Price $0.090 / 1M $0.188 / 1M
Output Price $0.340 / 1M $1.125 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 125,703 139,797
Output Tokens 13,317 30,947
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 5.41s 3.73s
Response Time (max) 29.95s 48.79s
Response Time (total) 108.12s 81.95s
Parameters 30.7B ~35B total (~3B active)
Availability Open source Closed

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#201 Gemma 4 31B

none
Cost
$0.001
Time
12.8s
Tokens
795 tok

#200 Qwen3.6 Flash

none
Cost
$0.005
Time
20.1s
Tokens
4,211 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 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 11.19s 8,381 735 0
Qwen3.6 Flash 5.4 10.0 33.3% 0 1.79s 6,488 889 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair