Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.2

At a Glance

Compare
Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind
GPT-5.2OpenAI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort#33 of 4649.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort#28 of 44$0.161 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort#34 of 3844.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.090Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026$1.75Openai · Sep 3, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.34Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026$14.00Openai · Sep 3, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262K400K
Model facts checkedSep 3, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.2
LMArena Document Arenadocument-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,424.51100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1416.71159012, 1432.31286462]; votes 12326; rank 351,401.1298% of row best · rating · gpt-5.2; 95% CI [1395.19508120, 1407.03614053]; votes 28212; rank 44
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,441.68100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1434.13929794, 1449.22204224]; votes 5894; rank 641,412.4398% of row best · rating · gpt-5.2; 95% CI [1409.21136225, 1415.65317114]; votes 78967; rank 125
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,275.98100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1269.84273447, 1282.11308989]; votes 35713; rank 331,229.4496% of row best · rating · gpt-5.2; 95% CI [1223.25930119, 1235.62760198]; votes 18997; rank 68
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above3 benchmark winsNo overall winner0 benchmark winsNo 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

FieldGemma 4 31BGPT-5.2
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindOpenAI
FamilyGemma 4Gpt 5 2
ModelGemma 4 31BGPT-5.2
VersionGemma 4 31BGPT-5.2
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-03-112025-12-11
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2025-08-31
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K400K
Total parameters31BUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessCerebras (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Openai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Gemma 4 31B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers5
Canonical IDgoogle/gemma-4-31B-it

GPT-5.2 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-5.2

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.2 FAQs

Is Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2?+

Gemma 4 31B is $0.090 and GPT-5.2 is $1.75 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 31B is cheaper on this metric. Gemma 4 31B is $0.34 and GPT-5.2 is $14.00 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 31B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2?+

GPT-5.2 has the larger sourced context window. Gemma 4 31B supports 262K and GPT-5.2 supports 400K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2 be self-hosted?+

Gemma 4 31B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemma 4 31B is open weight; GPT-5.2 is not marked open weight.

Can Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.2 understand images?+

Gemma 4 31B is documented with image input; GPT-5.2 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemma 4 31B is — and GPT-5.2 is 128K.

Do Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.2 support reasoning and tool use?+

Gemma 4 31B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GPT-5.2: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2?+

Gemma 4 31B has 5 sourced provider routes; GPT-5.2 has 2, so Gemma 4 31B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.2?+

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.

Send Feedback