Gemma 4 31B vs Mistral Medium 3.5 128B
At a Glance
| Compare |  Gemma 4 31BGoogle DeepMind |  Mistral Medium 3.5 128BMistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.090Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | Not reported |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.34Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | Not reported |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 262K | 262K |
| 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 | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,441.68100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1434.13929794, 1449.22204224]; votes 5894; rank 64 | 1,420.5899% of row best · rating · mistral-medium-3.5; 95% CI [1414.04225396, 1427.11615611]; votes 10996; rank 104 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,275.98100% of row best · rating · gemma-4-31b; 95% CI [1269.84273447, 1282.11308989]; votes 35713; rank 33 | 1,222.0596% of row best · rating · mistral-medium-3.5; 95% CI [1212.30064904, 1231.79518832]; votes 5090; rank 71 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 2 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 0 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
| Field | Gemma 4 31B | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Mistral AI |
| Family | Gemma 4 | Mistral Medium 3 5 128b |
| Model | Gemma 4 31B | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
| Version | Gemma 4 31B | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-03-11 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Total parameters | 31B | 127.7B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | other |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Unknown |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Cerebras (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Unknown |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Gemma 4 31B Capabilities
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image 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 Mistral Medium 3.5 128B FAQs
Is Gemma 4 31B or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemma 4 31B and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Only Gemma 4 31B has a directly sourced input price: $0.090 per million tokens. Only Gemma 4 31B has a directly sourced output price: $0.34 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Gemma 4 31B or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Gemma 4 31B is 262K and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemma 4 31B or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
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 Mistral Medium 3.5 128B be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Gemma 4 31B is open weight; Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is open weight.
Can Gemma 4 31B and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B understand images?+
Gemma 4 31B is documented with image input; Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemma 4 31B or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemma 4 31B is — and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is —.
Do Gemma 4 31B and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemma 4 31B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Mistral Medium 3.5 128B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemma 4 31B or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Gemma 4 31B has 5 sourced provider routes; Mistral Medium 3.5 128B has 0, so Gemma 4 31B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemma 4 31B or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
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.