Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Gemma 4 E2B vs Gemma 4 31B

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Reviewed by the GetInfoUs research teamLast reviewed: October 2026Editorial policy
Share
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Gemma 4 E2B vs Gemma 4 31B: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Gemma 4 E2B by Google and Gemma 4 31B by Google represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, both models offer identical input token rates. On output generation, costs are matched. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, Gemma 4 31B provides an expanded memory horizon with 262K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemma 4 E2B leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.

Head-to-Head Comparison

Switch & Compare Any Models

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Google

Gemma 4 E2B

On-Device 2B

Google's most lightweight 2B open model in the Gemma 4 lineup, designed for resource-constrained edge chips.

Intelligence Index55 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

131.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Google

Gemma 4 31B

Open Reasoning

Largest dense open reasoning model in the Gemma 4 series featuring 262K context and native chain-of-thought.

Intelligence Index81 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

262.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

68.5%

Key Differences at a Glance

  • Both models cost the same under this workload — choose on capability, not price.
  • Gemma 4 31B has a larger context window (262K vs 131K tokens).
  • Gemma 4 E2B is faster at 260 tok/s vs 80 tok/s.
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureGemma 4 E2BGemma 4 31B
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
5581
Provider
GoogleGoogle
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
131.1K tokens~197 A4 pages of text262.1K tokens~393 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
8K33K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
260 tok/s80 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
N/A68.5%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
N/A77%

Who Wins Where?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding

Evaluations ongoing

Cost
Tied
Identical monthly runtime cost
Speed
Gemma 4 E2B
+225% faster generation
Context
Gemma 4 31B
262.1K tokens window

Empirical Head-to-Head Benchmark Scores

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Gemma 4 E2BGemma 4 31B
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

N/Avs68.5%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

N/Avs77%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

67.2%vs84.8%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1260ptsvs1410pts
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

N/Avs86%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

260 tok/s vs80 tok/s

Latency & Response Time

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Gemma 4 E2B0.18s
Gemma 4 31B0.48s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Gemma 4 E2B2.10s
Gemma 4 31B6.73s

Real-Time Interactive Token Cost Simulator

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Gemma 4 E2B Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Gemma 4 31B Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
These models cost the same under this workload — no savings either way.Break-even

Gemma 4 E2B · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Ultra-low memory consumption (under 2.5GB)
  • Blazing fast 260 tps on consumer laptops
  • Open weights
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Basic reasoning only
  • Struggles with convoluted multi-step puzzles

Gemma 4 31B · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Frontier-grade reasoning in an open-weight 31B package
  • Expansive 262K context window
  • Competitive coding and math benchmark scores
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Requires 32GB+ VRAM or 4-bit quantisation to run locally
  • Slower generation speed when chain-of-thought is active

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricGemma 4 E2BGemma 4 31B
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.00$0.00
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
2K12K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
1K6K

Technical Specifications

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureGemma 4 E2BGemma 4 31B
Official API Model ID (SDK)models/gemma-4-e2bmodels/gemma-4-31b
API ProtocolGoogle Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDKGoogle Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDK
Release Date2026-042026-04
Knowledge CutoffJanuary 2026January 2026
ArchitectureUltra-compact edge transformerDense open reasoning transformer with native thinking
ParametersE2B (2B)31B
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)
Computer Use / GUI AgentSupported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxBuilt-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution SandboxBuilt-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution Sandbox
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 2 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 4 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 19 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 67 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationGoogle DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework VerifiedGoogle DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework Verified
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

Gemma 4 E2B vs Gemma 4 31B: Quick Answers

Which is more intelligent, Gemma 4 E2B or Gemma 4 31B?

Gemma 4 31B is more intelligent. It scores 81 compared with 55 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Gemma 4 E2B is faster, generating 260 tokens per second compared with 80 tokens per second.

Which model has lower latency?

Gemma 4 E2B has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.18s compared with 0.48s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Gemma 4 31B has a larger context window, supporting 262.1K tokens compared with 131.1K tokens.

Verdict

Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Gemma 4 E2B if your priority is Smartphones, IoT microcontrollers, and ultra-fast local keyword/entity extractors. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Gemma 4 31B if your workflow prioritizes Private enterprise reasoning servers, local software development, and deep research. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.

Frequently asked questions

How does Gemma 4 E2B compare to Gemma 4 31B in API token pricing and cost per token?+

Both Gemma 4 E2B and Gemma 4 31B are open-weights foundation models available at $0.00 direct API cost when self-hosted, or offered at identical baseline rates across major inference providers. Model selection depends on GPU deployment sizing and specialized benchmark performance rather than raw token price.

Which model has a larger context window: Gemma 4 E2B or Gemma 4 31B?+

Gemma 4 E2B supports a context window of 131K tokens (~98k words), while Gemma 4 31B supports 262K tokens (~197k words). Therefore, Gemma 4 31B can process more textual data and document context in a single prompt.

Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: Gemma 4 E2B or Gemma 4 31B?+

Gemma 4 E2B scores at the frontier of coding benchmarks, while Gemma 4 31B scores 68.5%. For complex autonomous debugging and agentic engineering, Gemma 4 31B provides robust code generation and tool calling.

What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Gemma 4 E2B and Gemma 4 31B?+

Gemma 4 E2B features native chain-of-thought extended thinking mode with configurable reasoning effort. In contrast, Gemma 4 31B provides chain-of-thought reasoning depth for complex math and science.

How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Gemma 4 E2B and Gemma 4 31B?+

Gemma 4 E2B generates approximately 260 tokens per second, while Gemma 4 31B delivers 80 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemma 4 E2B provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.

Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Gemma 4 E2B and Gemma 4 31B to optimize costs?+

Yes! Tiered multi-model routing can optimize for latency and accuracy: you can route high-frequency conversational turns and latency-sensitive queries to Gemma 4 E2B, and route deep architectural or complex reasoning queries to Gemma 4 E2B. This balanced routing strategy maximizes system throughput and answer quality.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

Sources: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs