Gemma 4 31B vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

BenchmarkGemma 4 31BLlama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,441.82100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1434.27306811, 1449.35895578]; votes 5900; rank 601,287.1389% of row best · rating · llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct; 95% CI [1282.87677682, 1291.39199009]; votes 39349; rank 243
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-08-27-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,275.94100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1269.53471972, 1282.35229256]; votes 34348; rank 311,141.4789% of row best · rating · llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct; 95% CI [1132.42029588, 1150.51619722]; votes 6936; rank 102
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above2 benchmark winsOverall lead0 benchmark wins

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

FieldAt a Glance
Google DeepMind · activeGemma 4 31BVerified Sep 3, 2026
Meta · activeLlama 4 Maverick 17B 128E InstructVerified Aug 28, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldGemma 4 31BLlama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindMeta
FamilyGemma 4Llama 4 Maverick 17b 128e Instruct
ModelGemma 4 31BLlama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct
VersionGemma 4 31BLlama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-03-112025-04-05
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K1,000K
Total parameters31B401.6B
Active parametersUnknown17B
Licenseapache-2.0other
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessCerebras (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, tools

16 comparable fields · 10 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Gemma 4 31B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$0.090
Output price$0.34
Serving providers5
Canonical IDgoogle/gemma-4-31B-it

Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Input price$0.20
Output price$0.696
Serving providers1
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All image comparisons →
APairBContext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vsdeveloper peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Gemma 4 31B vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct FAQs

Is Gemma 4 31B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemma 4 31B and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+

Gemma 4 31B is $0.090 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.20 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 31B is cheaper on this metric. Gemma 4 31B is $0.34 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.696 per million tokens, so Gemma 4 31B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Gemma 4 31B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+

Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct has the larger sourced context window. Gemma 4 31B supports 262K and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemma 4 31B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+

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 Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Gemma 4 31B is open weight; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is open weight.

Can Gemma 4 31B and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct understand images?+

Gemma 4 31B is documented with image input; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Gemma 4 31B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemma 4 31B is — and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is —.

Do Gemma 4 31B and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct support reasoning and tool use?+

Gemma 4 31B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct: tool calling and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Gemma 4 31B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+

Gemma 4 31B has 5 sourced provider routes; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct has 1, so Gemma 4 31B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Gemma 4 31B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+

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