AI Models · Open-Source vs Paid

Gemma 4 31B Open vs GPT-5.6 Luna Paid

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.6 Luna compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.

Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai

Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.

Choose Gemma 4 31B if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose GPT-5.6 Luna if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.6 Luna specs

SpecGemma 4 31BGPT-5.6 Luna
MakerGoogleOpenAI
TypeOpen-weightProprietary
Context window262K tokens1.1M tokens
Input price$0.1/M · free self-host$0.5/M
Output price$0.34/M · free self-host$3/M
Vision / multimodalYesYes
Tool / function callingYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo (API only)
LicenseGemma LicenseProprietary

Feature comparison

CapabilityGemma 4 31BGPT-5.6 Luna
Open weights (downloadable)
Self-hostable
Runs fully offline
Vision / multimodal
Tool / function calling
1M+ context window

Benchmarks: Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.6 Luna

Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).

Gemma 4 31B
GPT-5.6 Luna
Intelligence index
29.4
51.2
Coding index
43.4
71.4
GPQA
85.7%
91.1%
Humanity's Last Exam
22.7%
37.2%
Long Context Reasoning
62%
74%
SciCode
43.4%
52.5%
IFBench
75.6%
τ²-Bench
59.9%
τ-Bench Banking
15.1%
27.2%
Terminal-Bench
43.4%
80.9%
Terminal-Bench Hard
36.4%
Speed
35.5 tok/s
202.4 tok/s
Latency
1.04s
73.7s
Intelligence per $
22.8

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.6 Luna score

🏆 Best value & openness: Gemma 4 31B (4.8 vs 3.3 / 5)
CriterionGemma 4 31BGPT-5.6 Luna
Cost-efficiency5.04.0
Context window4.05.0
Openness5.01.5
Self-hosting5.01.0
Multimodality5.05.0

Scores come from live data — output price (cost), context length, open vs closed weights (openness & self-hosting) and vision/tool support (multimodality). Raw task quality isn't scored here; it depends on your benchmark — see the verdict.

What each model is

Gemma 4 31B Open

Google · Open-weight

Gemma 4 31B Instruct is Google DeepMind's 30.7B dense multimodal model supporting text and image input with text output. Features a 256K token context window, configurable thinking/reasoning mode, native function...

GPT-5.6 Luna Paid

OpenAI · Proprietary

GPT-5.6 Luna is a fast, cost-efficient model in OpenAI's GPT-5.6 series. It is suited for high-volume, latency-sensitive tasks such as chat, classification, and lightweight agentic workflows, providing capable reasoning for...

Other models in these families

These variants are tracked but not compared here — one page per family keeps the comparison readable.

Other variants tracked
Gemma 4 31B (free)Gemma 4 26B A4BGemma 4 26B A4B (free)Gemma 3 27BGemma 3 12BGemma 3n 4BGemma 3 4BGemma 2 27B

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 31B as good as GPT-5.6 Luna?

Gemma 4 31B is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but GPT-5.6 Luna may still lead on the hardest reasoning and agentic work. The gap keeps narrowing — benchmark both on your actual use case before deciding.

Can I run Gemma 4 31B locally?

Yes. Gemma 4 31B has open weights, so you can self-host it on your own GPUs or run it via a low-cost API. GPT-5.6 Luna is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.

How much cheaper is Gemma 4 31B?

Gemma 4 31B costs $0.34/M output vs $3/M for GPT-5.6 Luna — roughly 9x cheaper via API, and free if you self-host.

Gemma 4 31B vs GPT-5.6 Luna — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose Gemma 4 31B if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose GPT-5.6 Luna if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

People also compare

Explore more open-source AI

Browse the full open-source model leaderboard, thousands of tools and live benchmarks — all in one place.

Open the leaderboard →