Model Comparison
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 Coder Next
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Google, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Go Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) 14 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
40.0 reasoning / $0.21/1M
Lowest Price
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
$0.14/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
40.0 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
33.9 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) is 2.5x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 Coder Next.
Speed gap
Qwen3 Coder Next generates about 1.5x as many tokens per second as Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 Coder Next by 2.9 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 Coder Next by 11.0 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 Coder Next
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Go Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.14/1M | $0.35/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.40/1M | $1.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.21/1M | $0.56/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | |
| Release Date | Apr 2, 2026 | Feb 3, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 59.1 tok/s | 91.1 tok/s |
| TTFT | 950ms | 1166ms |
| Latency | 950ms | 1166ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 33.8 |
| Reasoning Score | 40.0 | 37.1 |
| Intelligence | 32.3 | 28.3 |
| Coding | 33.9 | 22.9 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 76.3% | 73.7% |
| HLE | 11.5% | 9.3% |
| SciCode | 41.1% | 32.3% |
| LCR | 36.0% | 40.0% |
| IFBench | 53.5% | 35.2% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 65.5% | 79.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 30.3% | 18.2% |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.14/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 40.0 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 33.9 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 Coder Next
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
