ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.8 Flash Next vs Gemma 4 31B IT

Too close to call on our weighted score (Gemma 4 31B IT 70, Qwen3.8 Flash Next 70). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 Flash Next

    Released Aug 27, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.20 / $0.50
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 Flash Next

  2. Google

    Gemma 4 31B IT

    Released Apr 2, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI142.8
    • Price$0.14 / $0.40
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 4 31B IT

  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 (Gemma 4 31B IT 70/100, Qwen3.8 Flash Next 70/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Gemma 4 31B IT on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceGemma 4 31B ITGemma 4 31B IT $0.205 · Qwen3.8 Flash Next $0.275 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameQwen3.8 Flash Next 262,144 · Gemma 4 31B IT 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.8 Flash NextQwen3.8 Flash Next: Text, Images, Video · Gemma 4 31B IT: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.8 Flash NextGemma 4 31B IT
Price50%7683
Inputs & features30%8070
Context window20%3737
Overall100%70/10070/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.8 Flash Next vs Gemma 4 31B IT specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.8 Flash NextAlibaba (Qwen)Gemma 4 31B ITGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—142.8
ECI rank—#86 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—75.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—73.3%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—10.4%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.20$0.14 (best)
Output$0.50$0.40 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.275$0.205 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 5 providersMedian of 30 providers
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenqwen-community-1.0Open
API model ID—gemma-4-31b-it
API providers538 (best)
ReleasedAug 27, 2026Apr 2, 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.

  • Qwen3.8 Flash Next$3.00
  • Gemma 4 31B IT$2.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

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

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Gemma 4 31B IT 70/100, Qwen3.8 Flash Next 70/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Gemma 4 31B IT on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

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

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.14 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (median across 30 API providers). Qwen3.8 Flash Next costs $0.20 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). 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 $0.275 for Qwen3.8 Flash Next (1.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3.8 Flash Next has not been scored yet and Gemma 4 31B IT has an ECI of 142.8.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 Flash Next and Gemma 4 31B IT yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next and Gemma 4 31B IT share the same 262,144-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.8 Flash Next up to 131,072, Gemma 4 31B IT up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

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

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (qwen-community-1.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next is the newest, released Aug 27, 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