Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.4 Nano
Compare Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.4 Nano side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Open Prompt, Object Detection, and Classification.
Compare Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.4 Nano live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.4 Nano: Overview
Gemma 4 31B is the largest dense model in Google's Gemma 4 family, built from the same research as Gemini 3 and released as open weights under the Apache 2.0 license. It supports a 256K token context window with text and image input, configurable thinking mode for step-by-step reasoning, and multilingual support across 140+ languages. The unquantized model fits on a single 80GB GPU.
For vision tasks, Gemma 4 31B supports image understanding with variable aspect ratios and resolutions, and can output structured bounding boxes for UI element detection, making it useful for document parsing and UI understanding. Compared to Gemma 3, it delivers stronger reasoning and multimodal performance. It is part of a four-size family alongside the 26B A4B MoE variant and two on-device models (E2B, E4B), with the 31B dense variant optimized for output quality and fine-tuning over inference speed.
GPT-5.4 nano is a high-throughput model developed by OpenAI and released on March 17, 2026, as the efficiency-optimized entry in the GPT-5.4 family. Engineered for cost-sensitive production environments and latency-critical workloads, it features an expanded 400,000-token context window that enables the processing of large document batches or extensive logs in a single pass. The model is primarily optimized for text-heavy operations, serving as a premier engine for high-volume classification, data extraction, ranking, and the orchestration of lightweight sub-agents where speed and low per-token costs are the primary requirements.
While it supports text and image inputs, GPT-5.4 nano is designed as a text-first worker rather than a specialized visual reasoning tool. In multi-model architectures, it is best utilized for structured text tasks and simple coding sub-tasks, leaving intensive vision reasoning and UI navigation to its sibling, GPT-5.4 mini. Compared to the previous GPT-5 nano, this version provides a significant leap in reliability for structured outputs and tool calling, making it a dependable and economical choice for developers building scalable, automated pipelines that require rapid execution at the edge of the GPT-5.4 ecosystem.
Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.4 Nano Comparison Table
| Property | Gemma 4 31B | GPT-5.4 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Apr 2026 | Mar 2026 |
| Context Window | 256K | 400K |
| Parameters | 31B | |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.120 | $0.200 |
| Output $/1M | $0.350 | $1.25 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Visual Understanding | ||
| Overall Score | 67.16% | 62.69% |
| Avg Response Time | 34.59s | 3.72s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 294 | 1.4K |
| Median output tokens | 169 | 105 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0001 | $0.0004 |
| Defect Detection | 80%(12/15) | 80%(12/15) |
| Document Understanding | 88.9%(8/9) | 77.8%(7/9) |
| Object Counting | 10%(1/10) | 30%(3/10) |
| Object Understanding | 71.4%(10/14) | 64.3%(9/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 73.7%(14/19) | 57.9%(11/19) |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 84.72% | 62.45% |
| Avg Response Time | 11.82s | 2.59s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 290 | 105 |
| Median output tokens | 131 | 87 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0001 | $0.0001 |
| Focused Scene OCR | 86.9%(86/99) | 55.6%(55/99) |
| Handwritten Math | 50%(5/10) | 20%(2/10) |
| License Plate Recognition | 93.3%(28/30) | 83.3%(25/30) |
| Text Recognition | 80%(24/30) | 70%(21/30) |
| VQA & Extraction | 85%(51/60) | 66.7%(40/60) |
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