Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 3 4B
Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Gemma 3 4B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, and OCR.
Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 3 4B live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 3 4B: Overview
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is a natively multimodal reasoning model from Google DeepMind in the Gemini 3 series, based on the Gemini 3 Pro architecture. It processes text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs within a 1 million token context window and produces text output up to 64K tokens. The model targets high-volume, latency-sensitive workloads and supports visual question answering, image and document data extraction, content moderation, classification, translation, automated speech recognition, and agentic data pipelines. It exposes configurable thinking levels of minimal, low, medium, and high, which set the depth of internal reasoning applied per request and let developers balance response quality against cost and latency.
On benchmarks reported at launch, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite scores 86.9% on GPQA Diamond and 76.8% on the MMMU Pro multimodal benchmark, and reaches an Elo score of 1432 on the Arena.ai leaderboard. According to Artificial Analysis benchmarks, it produces a 2.5 times faster time to first answer token and a 45% increase in output speed relative to Gemini 2.5 Flash. It also shows improved instruction following, higher audio input quality for automated speech recognition tasks, and support for structured JSON output used in data extraction pipelines.
Gemma 3 4B, released on March 12, 2025, is the mid-sized member of Google DeepMind’s open-weight Gemma 3 family. With about 4 billion parameters, it is multimodal—supporting text and image inputs and generating text outputs. Like the larger Gemma 3 models, it features a 128,000-token input context window with an output capacity of ~8,192 tokens, enabling it to handle long documents and mixed text–image reasoning tasks.
The 4B variant is designed as a balance between efficiency and capability: it offers multilingual support across 140+ languages, strong summarization and reasoning performance, and compatibility with moderate hardware. Inference can run with ~6.4 GB VRAM in BF16, or significantly less in quantized 8-bit (~4.4 GB) or 4-bit (~3.4 GB) modes, making it accessible to developers outside large-scale infrastructure. While it lags behind the 12B and 27B versions on the most complex reasoning and multimodal benchmarks, its lower compute footprint makes it ideal for research, prototyping, and practical deployment where efficiency matters.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 3 4B Comparison Table
| Property | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite | Gemma 3 4B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | ||
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2026 | Mar 2025 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 128K |
| Parameters | 4B | |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.250 | $0.050 |
| Output $/1M | $1.50 | $0.100 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Visual Understanding | ||
| Overall Score | 68.66% | 37.31% |
| Avg Response Time | 1.86s | 16.80s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.1K | |
| Median output tokens | 6 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0003 | |
| Defect Detection | 73.3%(11/15) | 60%(9/15) |
| Document Understanding | 77.8%(7/9) | 55.6%(5/9) |
| Object Counting | 30%(3/10) | 0%(0/10) |
| Object Understanding | 64.3%(9/14) | 42.9%(6/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 84.2%(16/19) | 26.3%(5/19) |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 89.96% | 64.19% |
| Avg Response Time | 1.32s | 0.92s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.1K | 300 |
| Median output tokens | 10 | 12 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0003 | <$0.0001 |
| Focused Scene OCR | 91.9%(91/99) | 63.6%(63/99) |
| Handwritten Math | 80%(8/10) | 10%(1/10) |
| License Plate Recognition | 100%(30/30) | 86.7%(26/30) |
| Text Recognition | 90%(27/30) | 73.3%(22/30) |
| VQA & Extraction | 83.3%(50/60) | 58.3%(35/60) |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology