The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 4 31B vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 33.0.

Google · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 33.0, ranking #15 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemma 4 31B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemma 4 31B
Google
Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
33.0
#115
51.0
#15
Reasoning
33.5
#107
47.5
#26
Agents
13.4
#106
38.0
#12
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.09 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.34 / M
— / M
Context window
262,144
—

Individual benchmarks

12 reported for Gemma 4 31B · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

Gemma 4 31B and Ling 3.1 Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

529.3B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 529.3B more parameters than Gemma 4 31B, making it 1724.1% larger.

Google
Gemma 4 31B
30.7Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
30.7B
Gemma 4 31B
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Gemma 4 31B specifies input context (262,144 tokens). Only Gemma 4 31B specifies output context (262,144 tokens).

Google
Gemma 4 31B
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemma 4 31B supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

Gemma 4 31B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 4 31B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 4 31B was released on 2026-04-02, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 6 months newer than Gemma 4 31B.

Gemma 4 31B

Apr 2, 2026

6 months ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

6mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 4 31B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-01, while Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 4 31B's training data extends to 2025-01-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date.

Gemma 4 31B

Jan 2025

Ling 3.1 Flash

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemma 4 31B and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 4 31B
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 4 31B vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, Gemma 4 31B or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 33.0. Gemma 4 31B is made by Google and Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemma 4 31B compare to Ling 3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

Gemma 4 31B scores AIME 2026: 89.2%, MMMLU: 88.4%, t2-bench: 86.4%, MathVision: 85.6%, MMLU-Pro: 85.2%. Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 4 31B and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Gemma 4 31B supports 262K tokens and Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemma 4 31B and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (33.0 vs 51.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 4 31B and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Gemma 4 31B is developed by Google and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons