Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) vs GLM 4.7 (Venice)
On the 8 use cases both models ran, Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) won 7 to 0, with 1 tied (better outcome first, then lower cost).
Pass rate: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) 88% (8 runs) vs GLM 4.7 (Venice) 75% (8 runs). Average cost per run: $0.0068 vs $0.03.
| Metric | Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) | GLM 4.7 (Venice) |
|---|---|---|
| Runs on shared use cases | 8 | 8 |
| Pass rate | 88% (7/8) | 75% (6/8) |
| Avg cost per run | $0.0068 | $0.03 |
| Avg wall time | 5m | 7m |
| Step-ins per run | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Use cases won | 7 | 0 |
Use case by use case
- Backtest a moving-average crossover on a bundled synthetic price file: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 100%)
- Boat fuel range with a reserve over a planned trip: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Catch log checked against a made-up fishing regulations table: tie (pass 0% vs 0%)
- Discounted cash flow valuation with mid-year option and a sensitivity grid: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 100%)
- Progressive tax on fictional brackets, and pre-tax vs after-tax savings comparison: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 100%)
- Read a synthetic annual-report excerpt and compute financial ratios: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 100%)
- Seeded Monte Carlo retirement odds against a stated success threshold: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 100%)
- Work backward from a retirement budget to a savings target, contributions and earliest retirement age: Gemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 100%)
Only use cases both models ran are compared; all settings of each model are grouped. How we score.