Gemma 4 31B vs Mistral Medium 3.1
Compare Gemma 4 31B and Mistral Medium 3.1 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Gemma 4 31B vs Mistral Medium 3.1 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 4 31B vs Mistral Medium 3.1: 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.
Mistral Medium 3.1, released in August 2025 as the mistral-medium-2508 update, is a proprietary frontier model from Mistral AI positioned between smaller open models and high-end closed LLMs. It is multimodal, handling both text and image inputs, with a context window of ~128K tokens.
Compared to Mistral Medium 3.0, the 3.1 release introduces improvements in reasoning, coding, STEM, and enterprise workflows, along with better tone control for conversational and business applications. It is designed for scalable enterprise deployments, including hybrid cloud and on-premises VPC setups. As part of Mistral’s Premier line, Medium 3.1 is a commercial-only offering: while it delivers strong accuracy and performance, trade-offs include higher costs than open-weight models, restricted fine-tuning access, and increased latency/cost for very large contexts.
Gemma 4 31B vs Mistral Medium 3.1 Comparison Table
| Property | Gemma 4 31B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Mistral | |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Apr 2026 | Aug 2025 |
| Context Window | 256K | 128K |
| Parameters | 31B | |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.120 | $0.400 |
| Output $/1M | $0.350 | $2.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| classification | Demo | |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Overall Score | 67.16% | |
| Avg Response Time | 34.59s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 294 | |
| Median output tokens | 169 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0001 | |
| Defect Detection | 80%(12/15) | |
| Document Understanding | 88.9%(8/9) | |
| Object Counting | 10%(1/10) | |
| Object Understanding | 71.4%(10/14) | |
| Spatial Understanding | 73.7%(14/19) | |
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