Compare/Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) vs JT-35B-Flash

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)vsJT-35B-Flash

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Google

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)

Input
$0/M
Output
$0/M
Speed
36 tok/s
TTFT
1.11s
China Mobile

JT-35B-Flash

Input
Output
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
Faster (tok/s)
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
Lower Latency
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
Benchmarks (2-0)
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)

Pricing Comparison

MetricGemma 4 31B (Reasoning)JT-35B-Flash
Input ($/M tokens)$0
Output ($/M tokens)$0
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)$0.00

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
36 tok/s
JT-35B-Flash
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)
1.11s
JT-35B-Flash

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.

Pricing. Pricing varies significantly between these models — check the table above for the exact per-token rates. Many production workloads actually surface input-token cost (retrieval-augmented prompts, code-context windows), so factor both directions.

Strengths. Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) is strongest on Coding Index (43.4), Intelligence Index (29.7). JT-35B-Flash leads on Intelligence Index (29.0).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. Google and China Mobile sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Google tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while China Mobile often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
29.729.0
Coding Index
43.4
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning)2 wins
0 winsJT-35B-Flash

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) or JT-35B-Flash?

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.00/M tokens vs $—/M for JT-35B-Flash.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for JT-35B-Flash. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) generates tokens faster at 36 tok/s vs — tok/s. Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) also has lower time-to-first-token (1.11s vs —s).

When should I use Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) vs JT-35B-Flash?

Choose based on your priorities: Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) for lower cost, Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) for stronger benchmark performance, and Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.