Gemma 3 4B vs GLM-OCR
Compare Gemma 3 4B and GLM-OCR side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in OCR.
Compare Gemma 3 4B vs GLM-OCR 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
Gemma 3 4B vs GLM-OCR: Overview
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.
GLM-OCR is a multimodal OCR model for complex document understanding, built on the GLM-V encoder-decoder architecture by Zhipu AI. The model combines a 0.4B-parameter CogViT visual encoder pre-trained on large-scale image-text data, a lightweight cross-modal connector with efficient token downsampling, and a 0.5B-parameter GLM language decoder, totaling 0.9B parameters. To address the inefficiency of standard autoregressive decoding in deterministic OCR tasks, GLM-OCR introduces a Multi-Token Prediction (MTP) mechanism that predicts multiple tokens per step, significantly improving decoding throughput while keeping memory overhead low through shared parameters. Training proceeds through four stages: visual encoder pretraining with MIM, CLIP, and distillation objectives; vision-language pretraining on document parsing, grounding, and VQA data; supervised fine-tuning on curated OCR datasets covering text, formula, table, and key information extraction; and full-task reinforcement learning to improve accuracy and structural consistency.
At the system level, GLM-OCR adopts a two-stage pipeline in which PP-DocLayout-V3 first performs layout analysis, followed by parallel region-level recognition. This design enables robust handling of diverse document layouts including tables, formulas, and multi-column text. The model supports document parsing and targeted recognition tasks, producing structured outputs in Markdown, JSON, and LaTeX formats across more than 100 languages. On the OmniDocBench V1.5 benchmark, GLM-OCR scores 94.62, and achieves 94.0 on OCRBench and 96.5 on UniMERNet for formula recognition.
Gemma 3 4B vs GLM-OCR Comparison Table
| Property | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-OCR |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Z.ai | |
| Category | open | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2025 | Mar 2026 |
| Context Window | 128K | — |
| Parameters | 4B | 0.9B |
| License | Proprietary | MIT |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.050 | |
| Output $/1M | $0.100 | |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | |
| Captioning | Demo | |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Visual Understanding | ||
| Overall Score | 37.31% | |
| Avg Response Time | 16.80s | |
| Defect Detection | 60%(9/15) | |
| Document Understanding | 55.6%(5/9) | |
| Object Counting | 0%(0/10) | |
| Object Understanding | 42.9%(6/14) | |
| Spatial Understanding | 26.3%(5/19) | |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 64.19% | 87.34% |
| Avg Response Time | 0.92s | 1.00s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 300 | |
| Median output tokens | 12 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | <$0.0001 | |
| Focused Scene OCR | 63.6%(63/99) | 87.9%(87/99) |
| Handwritten Math | 10%(1/10) | 100%(10/10) |
| License Plate Recognition | 86.7%(26/30) | 90%(27/30) |
| Text Recognition | 73.3%(22/30) | 90%(27/30) |
| VQA & Extraction | 58.3%(35/60) | 81.7%(49/60) |