Which model is better: Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Gemma 4 31B IT?
Gemma 4 31B IT is 96.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.12 vs. $3.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.36 vs. $15.00 for output tokens (25.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Gemma 4 31B IT delivers lower response latency at 115ms TTFT (195ms faster than Claude 3.5 Sonnet) with 155 vs. 80 tok/s throughput. Gemma 4 31B IT leads coding evaluations at 59.2% SWE-bench Verified vs. 49.0% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 71.2% vs. 59.4% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Gemma 4 31B IT
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$3.00
$0.12
Gemma 4 31B IT is 25.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$15.00
$0.36
Gemma 4 31B IT (97.6% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.300
$0.030
Gemma 4 31B IT is 10.0x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$3.75
$0.12
Gemma 4 31B IT is 31.3x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (8k out)
131k (16k out)
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (1.6x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
310ms
115ms
Gemma 4 31B IT (195ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
80 tok/s
155 tok/s
Gemma 4 31B IT (+75 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
49%
59.2%
Gemma 4 31B IT (+10.2% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
59.4%
71.2%
Gemma 4 31B IT (+11.8% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
78%
82.8%
Gemma 4 31B IT (+4.8% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
78.3%
91.5%
Gemma 4 31B IT (+13.2% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
46.2 / 100
80.3 / 100
Gemma 4 31B IT (+34.1 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Which is cheaper: Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Gemma 4 31B IT?
Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.12/1M input tokens ($0.36/1M output) compared to $3.00/1M input ($15.00/1M output) for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Gemma 4 31B IT?
Gemma 4 31B IT delivers faster first-token latency at 115ms TTFT (155 tok/s throughput) compared to 310ms TTFT (80 tok/s) for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
How do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Gemma 4 31B IT compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores 49% versus 59.2% for Gemma 4 31B IT. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores 59.4% versus 71.2% for Gemma 4 31B IT (and 78.3% vs 91.5% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
Choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet (Anthropic) for legacy enterprise workflows, code review pipelines, and human-like content generation — offering a 204k context window, 310ms TTFT, and $3.00/1M input pricing ($0.300/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Gemma 4 31B IT?
Choose Gemma 4 31B IT (Google) for self-hosted VPC inference, fine-tuned domain agents, sovereign healthcare/finance workloads, and low-latency local code generation — offering a 131k context window, 115ms TTFT, and $0.12/1M input pricing ($0.030/1M cached reads).
