Gemma 4 31B vs Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct
Compare Gemma 4 31B and Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Gemma 4 31B vs Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct 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 Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct: 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.
Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct is an open-weight multimodal vision-language model developed by Qwen / Alibaba Cloud as part of the Qwen3-VL series, designed for instruction-following tasks that combine text with visual inputs such as images and video. Released around October 2025 under the Apache-2.0 license, it targets developers who need capable multimodal reasoning without the scale or cost of very large models.
The model contains roughly 8.8 billion dense parameters and supports text, image, and video understanding with strong spatial perception, visual reasoning, and emerging visual agent abilities such as GUI interaction. A standout feature is its native ~256K token context window, extendable to around 1M tokens, enabling long-document reading and extended video comprehension. In today’s landscape, it balances openness, long-context capacity, and solid multimodal performance against heavier proprietary models. Typical applications include multimodal assistants, document and video analysis, visual question answering, and research or product prototyping where transparency and deployability matter.
Gemma 4 31B vs Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct Comparison Table
| Property | Gemma 4 31B | Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Qwen | |
| Category | open | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Apr 2026 | Oct 2025 |
| Context Window | 256K | 256K |
| Parameters | 31B | 8.8B |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.120 | $0.080 |
| Output $/1M | $0.350 | $0.500 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| classification | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Visual Understanding | ||
| 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) | |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 84.72% | |
| Avg Response Time | 11.82s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 290 | |
| Median output tokens | 131 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0001 | |
| Focused Scene OCR | 86.9%(86/99) | |
| Handwritten Math | 50%(5/10) | |
| License Plate Recognition | 93.3%(28/30) | |
| Text Recognition | 80%(24/30) | |
| VQA & Extraction | 85%(51/60) | |
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