Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nanbeige4.3-33B

Gemma 4 31B IT scores 74.1 (BB) on agent readiness against Nanbeige4.3-33B's 61 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3341 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Gemma 4 31B IT BB

Best for An agent with a 24 GB GPU or more that wants a dense multimodal cousin with tool calling under a plain licence

Ahead on

  • Reach, 95 against 55
  • Risk, 70 against 60
  • Documentation and upkeep, 65 against 56

Also in its favour

  • Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better

Watch for

No safety evaluation results published

Nanbeige4.3-33B C

Best for Agents with about 96 GB of GPU memory, or the 128 GB reference machine, that want an Apache-tagged 33B model for long coding and tool loops and can wait for independent results.

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

No independent benchmark result yet; every agentic number on the card is Nanbeige's own run

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runGemma 4 31B ITNanbeige4.3-33BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259555Gemma 4 31B IT +40
Risk20%207060Gemma 4 31B IT +10
Agent interface10%108585even
Documentation and upkeep10%106556Gemma 4 31B IT +9
Negative events≤1500
TotalBB 74.1/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactGemma 4 31B ITNanbeige4.3-33B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorGoogle DeepMindNanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0 (Hub metadata only; the repository has no LICENSE file)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtyesno
Last release2026-07-202026-10-24
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews3.8/5 (4)none

Verdicts

Gemma 4 31B IT

A dense multimodal cousin with documented tool calling, optional thinking and a 256K context, for general agent work and image reading on one 24 GB GPU through Google's 4-bit build. It runs in every major runtime under plain Apache 2.0. The main risk is that Google publishes no safety results and has gone quiet on the repository since July.

Nanbeige4.3-33B

A dense 33B Llama-architecture cousin for long agentic coding and office tasks, with per-request thinking, XML tool calls that stock vLLM and SGLang parse, and 512K of context. It needs about 96 GB at BF16, as Nanbeige ships no quantised build. Its agentic results so far are Nanbeige's own, with no safety results, training data notes or licence file.

Before you call either

Gemma 4 31B IT

  1. On the reference machine run llama-server -hf google/gemma-4-31B-it-qat-q4_0-gguf --hf-file gemma-4-31B_q4_0-it.gguf --jinja -c 32768, adding gemma-4-31B-it-mmproj.gguf for images
  2. Or ollama run gemma4:31b for the 20 GB Q4_K_M build
  3. In vLLM serve with --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser gemma4 --reasoning-parser gemma4, as vLLM's recipe does
  4. Thinking is off by default, so pass enable_thinking: true in chat_template_kwargs to turn it on, and expect the reasoning in the thought channel block
  5. Drop earlier thoughts from the history except on tool-call turns, as the card asks
  6. Use the card's sampling, temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 64
  7. Validate function names and arguments before running a call, and check JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding
  8. The w4a16 build relies on Marlin INT4 kernels that vLLM marks unsupported on AMD, so use the GGUF on the reference machine

Nanbeige4.3-33B

  1. Serve with vllm serve Nanbeige/Nanbeige4.3-33B --enable-auto-tool-choice --reasoning-parser qwen3 --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, as the card says, or SGLang with the same two parsers
  2. Keep tool_call_format at its default xml, since qwen3_coder parses that format; the json option writes Hermes-style JSON calls, which need a different parser such as vLLM's hermes
  3. Pass chat_template_kwargs {"preserve_thinking": true} for multi-turn tool use and coding, and {"enable_thinking": false} to skip reasoning, as the card recommends
  4. Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and up to 65,536 new tokens for agent work, and temperature 0.6 for reasoning and chat, per the card
  5. Send your own system prompt, since without one the template injects a Chinese identity line, or a Chinese tool-expert prompt when tools are passed
  6. Send one system message at the start only, as the template raises an error for a later one
  7. In plain Transformers pass use_cache=True to generate, since config.json and generation_config.json set it false; trust_remote_code isn't needed

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Gemma 4 31B IT or Nanbeige4.3-33B?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores 74.1 (BB) on agent readiness against Nanbeige4.3-33B's 61 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories.

Other comparisons with Gemma 4 31B IT or Nanbeige4.3-33B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.