ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.8 Max

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.8 Max 69, Gemma 4 31B IT 69). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Google

    Gemma 4 31B IT

    Released Apr 2, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI142.8
    • Price$0.14 / $0.40
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 4 31B IT

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 Max

    Released Aug 3, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI156.6
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 Max

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3.8 Max 69/100, Gemma 4 31B IT 69/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 Max for raw capability and Gemma 4 31B IT on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.8 MaxCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 Max 156.6 · Gemma 4 31B IT 142.8
  • Lowest priceGemma 4 31B ITGemma 4 31B IT $0.205 · Qwen3.8 Max $3.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.8 MaxQwen3.8 Max 1,000,000 · Gemma 4 31B IT 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.8 MaxGemma 4 31B IT: Text, Images · Qwen3.8 Max: Text, Images, PDFs, Video
  • Self-hostingGemma 4 31B ITPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemma 4 31B ITQwen3.8 Max
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6986
Price25%8327
Inputs & features15%7090
Context window10%3760
Overall100%69/10069/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.8 Max specifications side by side
SpecificationGemma 4 31B ITGoogleQwen3.8 MaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)142.8156.6 (best)
ECI rank#86 of 148#20 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions75.8%92.7% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—74.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics73.3%99.4% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions10.4%45.8% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.14 (best)$2.00
Output$0.40 (best)$6.00
Cached input—$0.25
Blended (3:1)$0.205 (best)$3.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 30 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · xhigh
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDgemma-4-31b-itqwen3.8-max
API providers38 (best)25
ReleasedApr 2, 2026Aug 3, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemma 4 31B IT$2.20
  • Qwen3.8 Max$32.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemma 4 31B IT or Qwen3.8 Max?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3.8 Max 69/100, Gemma 4 31B IT 69/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 Max for raw capability and Gemma 4 31B IT on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B IT or Qwen3.8 Max?

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.14 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (median across 30 API providers). Qwen3.8 Max costs $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.205 per million tokens for Gemma 4 31B IT versus $3.00 for Qwen3.8 Max (15× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 Max 156.6 (#20 of 148) and Gemma 4 31B IT 142.8 (#86 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (154.5–158.8 vs 140.3–144.9), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.8 Max 92.7%, Gemma 4 31B IT 75.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.8 Max 99.4%, Gemma 4 31B IT 73.3%; SimpleQA Verified — Qwen3.8 Max 45.8%, Gemma 4 31B IT 10.4%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemma 4 31B IT and Qwen3.8 Max yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.8 Max leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.8 Max has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Gemma 4 31B IT. Maximum output per response: Gemma 4 31B IT up to 32,768, Qwen3.8 Max up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemma 4 31B IT accepts text and images; Qwen3.8 Max accepts text, images, PDFs and video. Qwen3.8 Max handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Gemma 4 31B IT publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.8 Max is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.8 Max is the newest, released Aug 3, 2026. Gemma 4 31B IT came out Apr 2, 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons