Roboflow

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 4 12B

Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Gemma 4 12B side-by-side.

Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 4 12B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 4 12B: Overview

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite

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 4 12B

Gemma 4 12B is an open-weight multimodal model from Google in the Gemma 4 family. It is intended for text and image understanding tasks such as visual question answering, OCR, captioning, and document understanding, with a smaller parameter footprint than the larger Gemma 4 variants.

This entry is connected to Roboflow Playground vision evals for comparison. No runnable Playground workflow is configured yet, so the model page is used for discovery and benchmark context rather than direct hosted inference.

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 4 12B Comparison Table

PropertyGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemma 4 12B
OrganizationGoogleGoogle
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMar 2026Jun 2026
Context Window1.0M
Parameters12B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.250
Output $/1M$1.50
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemo
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%
62.69%
Avg Response Time1.86s6.88s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.1K
Median output tokens6
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0003
Defect Detection
73.3%(11/15)
73.3%(11/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
88.9%(8/9)
Object Counting
30%(3/10)
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
78.6%(11/14)
Spatial Understanding
84.2%(16/19)
57.9%(11/19)
OCR
Overall Score
89.96%
Avg Response Time1.32s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.1K
Median output tokens10
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0003
Focused Scene OCR
91.9%(91/99)
Handwritten Math
80%(8/10)
License Plate Recognition
100%(30/30)
Text Recognition
90%(27/30)
VQA & Extraction
83.3%(50/60)

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