Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemma 4 31B

Claude Opus 5.5 leads Gemma 4 31B on coding, 88.8 to 39.0 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Gemma 4 31B costs 50.0x less per output token ($0.40 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 54 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic
Coding
88.8
Overall
87.1
Output $/M
$20.00
53
Gemma 4 31BGoogle
Coding
39.0
Overall
42.1
Output $/M
$0.40
1
vs boards won of 54 shared

Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemma 4 31B: which to pick

Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for coding: it scores 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 39.0 for Gemma 4 31B.

Pick Gemma 4 31B for output tokens 50.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $20.00 per million) and work measured by SAGE (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
54
Claude Opus 5.5 only
55
Gemma 4 31B only
17
Like-for-like categories
8 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
Claude Opus 5.5 88.8 from 5 benchmarks, Gemma 4 31B 39.0 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 62.8 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LiveBench browser: Claude Opus 5.5 80.0% against Gemma 4 31B 4.0%, 76.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 5.5 $20.00 against Gemma 4 31B $0.40 per million output tokens, 50.0x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 5.5 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
CategoryClaude Opus 5.5BarsGemma 4 31BTies
Coding90
Intelligence20
Agentic work30
Reasoning80
Math30
Knowledge60
Web design10
General211
All shared boards531
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index90
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
LiveBench coding96.3%49.0%Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev18071367Claude Opus 5.5
AA Coding IndexNot measured43.4Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)65.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)90.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)66.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)18.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)95.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)87.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)74.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SciCode66.9%45.5%Claude Opus 5.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured36.4%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
FrontierCode54.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierSWE62.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
WeirdMLNot measured52.3%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
MirrorCode77.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ALE-Bench2147.4925.5Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: coding15451459Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: software and IT15381463Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: React18551359Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML17531380Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: from an image1753Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SciCode18.5%8.9%Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
AA Intelligence Index57.614.7Claude Opus 5.5
Epoch Capabilities Index168.8143.0Claude Opus 5.5
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured4.2Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1316Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1308Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1368Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench research85.0%44.4%Claude Opus 5.5
LiveBench browser80.0%4.0%Claude Opus 5.5
LiveBench long agentic85.0%13.3%Claude Opus 5.5
SREBench (Vals AI)33.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)58.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)45.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)50.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)9.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)75.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)47.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vals Science Index58.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)91.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)14.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)14.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured65.5%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
APEX-Agents73.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Remote Labor Index21.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SpireClimb3.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,235Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Search1213Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index80
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
LiveBench reasoning92.2%68.3%Claude Opus 5.5
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured85.7%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)61.4%23.6%Claude Opus 5.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.6%75.8%Claude Opus 5.5
ARC-AGI98.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ARC-AGI-293.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Chess puzzles67.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles71.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
EBR-bench71.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts15361448Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: expert15491464Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15351456Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: diagrams13451283Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: homework13621310Claude Opus 5.5
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured63.5%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%73.3%Claude Opus 5.5
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 391.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 495.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProofBench100.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: math15181463Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work15161465Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured52.6%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured61.4%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SimpleQA Verified72.2%10.4%Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: science15241457Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare15091451Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: legal and government15181438Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14941430Claude Opus 5.5
FACTS Benchmark Suite65.3%45.3%Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
Design Arena: websites1335Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1385Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1461Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1397Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1476Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1329Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench design86.9%58.4%Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index211
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 4 31BLeader
Vals Index70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench data analysis80.3%53.3%Claude Opus 5.5
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)70.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)45.8%55.0%Gemma 4 31B
MedScribe (Vals AI)91.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IFBenchNot measured75.6%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.7%69.7%Claude Opus 5.5
DTBench98.9%82.7%Claude Opus 5.5
LMCA68.2%39.3%Claude Opus 5.5
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured30.6%Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Furniture assembly83.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text15161443Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: instruction following15371433Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: creative writing15351417Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision13211276Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: English15191451Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: non-English15071430Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Chinese15821475Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Japanese1534Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: French14931436Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Spanish15081442Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Russian15171460Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1433Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn15011452Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: longer queries15321446Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: writing and language15321432Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media15151405Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: English13171271Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1326Only Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text13261282Claude Opus 5.5
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 writing13201285Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena DocumentNot measured1425Only Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemma 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

Claude Opus 5.5$0.014Fits in one request
Gemma 4 31B$0.0003Fits in one request

Gemma 4 31B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$0.260Fits in one request
Gemma 4 31B$0.0082Fits in one request

Gemma 4 31B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$1.00Fits 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 Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemma 4 31B
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 5.5Google Gemma 4 31B
MakerAnthropicGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026April 2, 2026
Context window1M262K
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.14
Output $/Mtok$20.00$0.40
Coding index88.839.0
Independent measurements behind it52
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Gemma 4 31B for coding?

Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for coding: it scores 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 39.0 for Gemma 4 31B. Pick Gemma 4 31B for output tokens 50.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $20.00 per million) and work measured by SAGE (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemma 4 31B?

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 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, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemma 4 31B?

Claude Opus 5.5, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemma 4 31B comparison based on?

54 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 5.5's coding index rests on 5 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

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-gemma-4-31b-it" title="Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemma 4 31B, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-gemma-4-31b-it">LLMBenchmark.ai, Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemma 4 31B</a></p>