LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.1-Codex

Updated October 21, 2026. 10 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Gemma 4 31BGoogle
Coding
38.3
Overall
14.7
Output $/M
$0.40
5
GPT-5.1-CodexOpenAI
Coding
50.5
Overall
23.7
Output $/M
$10.00
5
vs boards won of 10 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5.1-Codex for coding: it scores 50.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 38.3 for Gemma 4 31B.

Pick Gemma 4 31B when output tokens cost 25.0x less, or when what matters is LMArena WebDev or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
10
Gemma 4 31B only
58
GPT-5.1-Codex only
16
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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
Gemma 4 31B 38.3 from 2 benchmarks, GPT-5.1-Codex 50.5 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 17.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 4 31B 65.5% against GPT-5.1-Codex 83.0%, 17.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 4 31B $0.40 against GPT-5.1-Codex $10.00 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
Context window
Gemma 4 31B takes 262K tokens, GPT-5.1-Codex 400K.

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
CategoryGemma 4 31BBarsGPT-5.1-CodexTies
Coding31
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
General20
All shared boards55
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index31
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured66.0%Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LiveBench coding49.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena WebDev13671337Gemma 4 31B
AA Coding Index43.4Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured85.5%Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured13.1%Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.9%Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
SciCode45.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)36.4%34.8%Gemma 4 31B
Terminal-BenchNot measured57.8%Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
WeirdML52.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
ALE-Bench925.51244.9GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text: coding1459Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1463Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena WebDev: React1359Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13801346Gemma 4 31B
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
AA Intelligence Index14.723.7GPT-5.1-Codex
Epoch Capabilities Index143.0Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
AA Agentic Index4.2Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1018Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1086Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1191Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LiveBench research44.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LiveBench browser4.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LiveBench long agentic13.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom65.5%83.0%GPT-5.1-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
LiveBench reasoning68.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.7%86.0%GPT-5.1-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)23.6%25.7%GPT-5.1-Codex
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)75.8%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1448Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: expert1464Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1456Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1283Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: homework1310Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured95.7Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured95.7%Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
OTIS Mock AIME73.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: math1463Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1465Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)52.6%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured86.0%Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
SimpleQA Verified10.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: science1457Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1451Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1438Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1430Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1162Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1237Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1138Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1213Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1153Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LiveBench design58.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
LiveBench data analysis53.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
SAGE (Vals AI)55.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
IFBench75.6%70.0%Gemma 4 31B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.7%69.3%Gemma 4 31B
DTBench82.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMCA39.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Surface Evolver Bench30.6%Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text1443Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1433Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1417Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision1276Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: English1451Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1430Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1475Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: French1436Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1442Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1460Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: Polish1433Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1452Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1446Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1432Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1405Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: English1271Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1326Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1282Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: humor1280Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1218Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1226Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1285Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
LMArena Document1425Not measuredOnly Gemma 4 31B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 4 31BGPT-5.1-CodexLeader
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

Gemma 4 31B$0.0004Fits in one request
GPT-5.1-Codex$0.0063Fits in one request

Gemma 4 31B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 4 31B$0.011Fits in one request
GPT-5.1-Codex$0.092Fits in one request

Gemma 4 31B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 4 31B$0.044Fits in one request
GPT-5.1-Codex$0.350Fits 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 Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.1-Codex
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 4 31BOpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 2, 2026November 13, 2025
Context window262K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.20$1.25
Output $/Mtok$0.40$10.00
Coding index38.350.5
Independent measurements behind it22
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.892
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 4 31B better than GPT-5.1-Codex for coding?

Pick GPT-5.1-Codex for coding: it scores 50.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 38.3 for Gemma 4 31B. Pick Gemma 4 31B when output tokens cost 25.0x less, or when what matters is LMArena WebDev or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.1-Codex?

Gemma 4 31B costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1-Codex costs $1.25 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.1-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 4 31B or GPT-5.1-Codex?

GPT-5.1-Codex, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.1-Codex comparison based on?

10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 4 31B's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.1-Codex'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/gemma-4-31b-it-vs-gpt-5-1-codex" title="Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.1-Codex, 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/gemma-4-31b-it-vs-gpt-5-1-codex">LLMBenchmark.ai, Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.1-Codex</a></p>