Gemma 4 31B vs GLM 5.1
At a Glance
| Compare |  Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind |  GLM 5.1Z.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.090Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $1.05Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.34Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $3.50Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 262K | 203K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 31B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,441.6899% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1434.13929794, 1449.22204224]; votes 5894; rank 64 | 1,462.38100% of row best · rating · glm-5.1; 95% CI [1458.52340519, 1466.22702609]; votes 48901; rank 33 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 1 benchmark winNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Gemma 4 31B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Z.ai |
| Family | Gemma 4 | Glm 5 1 |
| Model | Gemma 4 31B | GLM-5.1 |
| Version | Gemma 4 31B | GLM-5.1 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-03-11 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 203K |
| Total parameters | 31B | 753.9B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | mit |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Cerebras (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Gemma 4 31B Capabilities
GLM 5.1 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | vs | GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemma 4 31B vs GLM 5.1 FAQs
Is Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemma 4 31B and GLM 5.1, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1?+
Gemma 4 31B is $0.090 and GLM 5.1 is $1.05 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 31B is cheaper on this metric. Gemma 4 31B is $0.34 and GLM 5.1 is $3.50 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 31B is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1?+
Gemma 4 31B has the larger sourced context window. Gemma 4 31B supports 262K and GLM 5.1 supports 203K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Gemma 4 31B is open weight; GLM 5.1 is open weight.
Can Gemma 4 31B and GLM 5.1 understand images?+
Gemma 4 31B is documented with image input; GLM 5.1 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemma 4 31B is — and GLM 5.1 is —.
Do Gemma 4 31B and GLM 5.1 support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemma 4 31B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5.1: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1?+
Gemma 4 31B has 5 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.1 has 4, so Gemma 4 31B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemma 4 31B or GLM 5.1?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.