Gemma 3 4B vs GPT-5.5
Compare Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Gemma 3 4B vs GPT-5.5 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 GPT-5.5: 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.
GPT-5.5 is a multimodal large language model released by OpenAI on April 23, 2026, engineered for autonomous, multi-step knowledge work and agentic workflows. It accepts text, images, and code as input, featuring enhanced spatial reasoning and visual grounding to support its computer use capabilities for operating software and navigating UI elements. Built to execute complex workflows end-to-end, the model interprets loosely defined tasks, selects appropriate tools, and performs self-verification with minimal user intervention. It is available in a standard version, a Thinking mode for extended reasoning budgets, and a Pro variant that uses parallel test-time compute for maximum precision on complex tasks.
Co-optimized with NVIDIA for GB200 NVL72 infrastructure, GPT-5.5 delivers per-token latency comparable to its predecessor GPT-5.4 while maintaining a 1-million-token context window. Despite increased capability, the model achieves greater token efficiency in coding and data analysis workflows, often completing tasks with fewer total tokens than previous versions. OpenAI reports a 60% reduction in hallucination rate compared to GPT-5.4, improving reliability for accuracy-sensitive applications. API access is available via the Responses and Chat Completions endpoints at $5 per million input tokens and $30 per million output tokens, double the unit price of GPT-5.4.
Gemma 3 4B vs GPT-5.5 Comparison Table
| Property | Gemma 3 4B | GPT-5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2025 | Apr 2026 |
| Context Window | 128K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | 4B | |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.050 | $5.00 |
| Output $/1M | $0.100 | $30.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Overall Score | 37.31% | 77.61% |
| Avg Response Time | 16.80s | 30.12s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.4K | |
| Median output tokens | 138 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.011 | |
| Defect Detection | 60%(9/15) | 86.7%(13/15) |
| Document Understanding | 55.6%(5/9) | 88.9%(8/9) |
| Object Counting | 0%(0/10) | 30%(3/10) |
| Object Understanding | 42.9%(6/14) | 92.9%(13/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 26.3%(5/19) | 78.9%(15/19) |
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