Compare/Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) vs Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)vsGemini 3 Pro Preview (high)

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Google

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)

Input
$0/M
Output
$0/M
Speed
35 tok/s
TTFT
1.08s
Google

Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)

Input
$2/M
Output
$12/M
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
Faster (tok/s)
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
Lower Latency
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
Benchmarks (1-1)
Tie

Pricing Comparison

MetricGemma 4 31B (Reasoning)Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)
Input ($/M tokens)$0$2
Output ($/M tokens)$0$12
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)$0.00
Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)$3.20

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
35 tok/s
Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
1.08s
Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) and Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high) split the benchmark comparison evenly at 1–1. The tiebreaker here is price, speed, and what you actually run them on.

Pricing. Pricing varies significantly between these models — check the table above for the exact per-token rates. Many production workloads actually surface input-token cost (retrieval-augmented prompts, code-context windows), so factor both directions.

Strengths. Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) is strongest on Coding Index (43.4), Intelligence Index (29.7). Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high) leads on Intelligence Index (40.6).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. Both models come from the same vendor, so the choice comes down to which tier or generation fits your workload — not vendor lock-in.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) costs $0.00 ($0/year); Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high) costs $240.00 ($2880/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) ≈ $0.00/run, Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high) ≈ $34.00/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) ≈ $0/run, Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high) ≈ $1600/run. Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Head-to-head deltas

  • Benchmark wins tie exactly at 1–1. The tiebreaker on raw benchmark parity will be price, speed, or capability coverage.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
29.740.6
Coding Index
43.4
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)1 wins
1 winsGemini 3 Pro Preview (high)

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) or Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)?

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.00/M tokens vs $4.50/M for Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high).

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

It's a tie — both models win 1 benchmarks each across 12 evaluated categories. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) generates tokens faster at 35 tok/s vs — tok/s. Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) also has lower time-to-first-token (1.08s vs —s).

When should I use Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) vs Gemini 3 Pro Preview (high)?

Choose based on your priorities: Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) for lower cost, both perform similarly on benchmarks, and Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.