Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova 2 Lite vs Gemma 4 31B

Gemma 4 31B leads Nova 2 Lite on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 14.7 to 13.4, and Gemma 4 31B costs 6.3x less per output token ($0.40 vs $2.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 28 benchmarks have a result for both.

Nova 2 LiteAmazon
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.50
0
Gemma 4 31BGoogle
Coding
39.0
Overall
42.1
Output $/M
$0.40
28
vs boards won of 28 shared

Nova 2 Lite or Gemma 4 31B: which to pick

Only Gemma 4 31B has a coding score, 39.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova 2 Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Nova 2 Lite for a larger context window (1M against 262K tokens).

Shared results
28
Nova 2 Lite only
3
Gemma 4 31B only
43
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Nova 2 Lite not benchmarked, Gemma 4 31B 39.0 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 16.8 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: Nova 2 Lite 236.3 against Gemma 4 31B 925.5, 23.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova 2 Lite $2.50 against Gemma 4 31B $0.40 per million output tokens, 6.3x apart.
Context window
Nova 2 Lite takes 1M tokens, Gemma 4 31B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova 2 LiteBarsGemma 4 31BTies
Coding04
Intelligence01
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General014
All shared boards028
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
LiveBench codingNot measured49.0%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1367Only Gemma 4 31B measured
AA Coding Index23.043.4Gemma 4 31B
SciCodeNot measured45.5%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured36.4%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
WeirdMLNot measured52.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
ALE-Bench236.3925.5Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: coding13851459Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: software and IT13941463Gemma 4 31B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1359Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1380Only Gemma 4 31B measured
SciCodeNot measured8.9%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
AA Intelligence Index13.414.7Gemma 4 31B
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured143.0Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured4.2Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LiveBench researchNot measured44.4%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LiveBench browserNot measured4.0%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured13.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured65.5%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
LiveBench reasoningNot measured68.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured85.7%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.6%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured75.8%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13641448Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: expert13591464Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13851456Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1283Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1310Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured63.5%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured73.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: math13591463Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: mathematical work13691465Gemma 4 31B
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured52.6%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured61.4%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured10.4%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: science13821457Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13861451Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: legal and government13591438Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: business and finance13691430Gemma 4 31B
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured45.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
LiveBench designNot measured58.4%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index014
General benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured53.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured55.0%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
IFBenchNot measured75.6%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured69.7%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
DTBenchNot measured82.7%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMCANot measured39.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured30.6%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text13621443Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: instruction following13351433Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: creative writing12921417Gemma 4 31B
LMArena VisionNot measured1276Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: English13851451Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: non-English13371430Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: Chinese13641475Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: German1343Not measuredOnly Nova 2 Lite measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1273Not measuredOnly Nova 2 Lite measured
LMArena Text: Korean1281Not measuredOnly Nova 2 Lite measured
LMArena Text: French13811436Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: Spanish13751442Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: Russian13421460Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: Polish13271433Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: multi-turn13381452Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: longer queries13351446Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: writing and language13181432Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13091405Gemma 4 31B
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1271Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1326Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1282Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1280Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1218Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1226Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1285Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1425Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGemma 4 31BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Nova 2 Lite$0.0015Fits in one request
Gemma 4 31B$0.0003Fits in one request

Gemma 4 31B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova 2 Lite$0.022Fits in one request
Gemma 4 31B$0.0082Fits in one request

Gemma 4 31B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova 2 Lite$0.085Fits in one request
Gemma 4 31B$0.032Fits in one request

Gemma 4 31B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Nova 2 Lite and Gemma 4 31B
SpecificationAmazon Nova 2 LiteGoogle Gemma 4 31B
MakerAmazonGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 2, 2025April 2, 2026
Context window1M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.14
Output $/Mtok$2.50$0.40
Coding indexNot benchmarked39.0
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova 2 Lite better than Gemma 4 31B for coding?

Only Gemma 4 31B has a coding score, 39.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova 2 Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova 2 Lite for a larger context window (1M against 262K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Nova 2 Lite or Gemma 4 31B?

Nova 2 Lite costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Gemma 4 31B costs $0.14 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Nova 2 Lite or Gemma 4 31B?

Nova 2 Lite, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Nova 2 Lite vs Gemma 4 31B comparison based on?

28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Nova 2 Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Gemma 4 31B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next