Roboflow

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-6.1 Sol

GPT-6.1 Sol averages 81.7% across five Vision Evals tasks and Gemma 4 31B 57.7% across four (#9 and #45 of 69 models), so GPT-6.1 Sol leads overall.

  • GPT-6.1 Sol wins all 4 tasks both ran, with its widest lead on object detection (80.8% vs 47.5%).
  • Gemma 4 31B is about a fifth of the cost: $0.0015 vs $0.0068 overall average cost per sample.
  • GPT-6.1 Sol is faster: 12.8s vs 34.4s per sample.

Compare Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-6.1 Sol 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.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GoogleGemma 4 31B
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-6.1 Sol
Run to compare this model.

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-6.1 Sol on Vision Evals

Score by taskGemma 4 31BGPT-6.1 Sol
Object Detection
47.5
80.8
Reasoning
52.8
83.7
Counting
51.4
78.8
Identification
79.2
89.6

Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-6.1 Sol Comparison Table

Evals updated November 12, 2026Pricing updated November 13, 2026

PropertyGemma 4 31BGPT-6.1 Sol
OrganizationGoogleOpenAI
Categoryopenclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateApr 2026Sep 2026
Context Window256K1.1M
Parameters31Bundisclosed
LicenseApache 2.0Proprietary
Commercial usefree for commercial usecommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.200$2.00
Output $/1M$0.400$10.00
Vision Tasks
Promptable Concept SegmentationNot listedDemo
Both support 10 more tasks
Model Features
Both support 3 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
57.7%*
81.7%
Quantizationsself-hosted
BF1657.7%FP857.7%QAT-W4A1657.6%hardware →
Avg cost / sample$0.0015$0.0068
Avg speed / sample34.36s12.82s
By task
Object Detection (low)
47.5%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 46.8 to 48.0
$0
80.8%
±0.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.7 to 80.9
$0.010
Object Detection (high)–
81.6%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 82.0
$0.022
Counting (low)
51.4%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.6 to 54.0
$0
78.8%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 82.4
$0.0037
Counting (high)–
80.2%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.0 to 83.8
$0.0057
Identification (low)
79.2%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 81.3
$0
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0025
Identification (high)–
88.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0030
OCR (low)–
75.8%
$0.0069
by category
Single value
58.3%
Transcription
95.7%
Structured JSON
89.5%
Text localization
74.4%
OCR (high)–
75.8%
$0.016
by category
Single value
56.5%
Transcription
96.0%
Structured JSON
90.4%
Text localization
76.7%
Reasoning (low)
52.8%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 51.7 to 54.3
$0
83.7%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 84.8
$0.0033
Reasoning (high)–
88.7%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.4 to 91.4
$0.0042

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-6.1 Sol: Overview

Gemma 4 31B

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-6.1 Sol

GPT-6.1 Sol is a reasoning model in OpenAI's GPT-6 series that accepts text and image input and returns text. It is an upgrade to GPT-6 Sol positioned to approach the intelligence of the larger GPT-6 Astra model on agentic coding, computer use, and professional knowledge work. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning effort control, ranging from low settings for simple turns to maximum settings for harder tasks, and can be driven with tool use enabled or disabled. It operates over a context window of roughly one million tokens and emits up to 128,000 output tokens in a single response, which supports long-running agent loops over large codebases and multi-document collections. Audio and video inputs are not supported.

OpenAI reports that GPT-6.1 Sol performs on par with or better than GPT-6 Sol across its image input safety evaluations, and that the share of responses containing a factual error at low reasoning effort falls from 11.4 percent to 7.7 percent.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6.1 Sol performed better. It scores higher on all 4 vision tasks and averages 81.7% (#9 of 69) against 57.7% (#45 of 69) for Gemma 4 31B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, GPT-6.1 Sol leads with 80.8% against 47.5%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemma 4 31B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0015 per sample against $0.0068. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GPT-6.1 Sol is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 12.8s per inference against 34.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.