Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
Gemma 4 31B IT scores 74.1 (BB) on agent readiness against Recursive Flint's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Recursive Flint leads on agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3023 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
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 75
- Risk, 70 against 60
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
Watch for
No safety evaluation results published
Best for Agents doing repository work on a 32 to 48 GB Mac or NVIDIA box that want a fast sparse coder with documented tool calls and a plain licence.
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 90 against 85
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Gemma 4 31B IT | Recursive Flint | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 75 | Gemma 4 31B IT +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 60 | Gemma 4 31B IT +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 90 | Recursive Flint +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 65 | 67 | Recursive Flint +2 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | BB 74.1/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Gemma 4 31B IT | Recursive Flint |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Google DeepMind | Recursive |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-10-21 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no 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 reviews | 3.8/5 (4) | 3.5/5 (4) |
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.
Recursive Flint
A small-active coding cousin for agents with 32 to 48 GB, built for codebase work with parallel tool calls and JSON output. It needs llama.cpp b11803 or Ollama 0.40.8 or later, and the BF16 checkpoint needs a 141 GB GPU. Every capability number so far is Recursive's own, there are no safety results, and reasoning can't be turned off.
Before you call either
Gemma 4 31B IT
- 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 - Or
ollama run gemma4:31bfor the 20 GB Q4_K_M build - In vLLM serve with
--enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser gemma4 --reasoning-parser gemma4, as vLLM's recipe does - Thinking is off by default, so pass
enable_thinking: truein chat_template_kwargs to turn it on, and expect the reasoning in the thought channel block - Drop earlier thoughts from the history except on tool-call turns, as the card asks
- Use the card's sampling, temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 64
- Validate function names and arguments before running a call, and check JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding
- The w4a16 build relies on Marlin INT4 kernels that vLLM marks unsupported on AMD, so use the GGUF on the reference machine
Recursive Flint
- Quickest start is
ollama run flint(Ollama 0.40.8 or later), about 23 GB of files; Ollama's Flint support is in its MLX runner, so on Linux prefer llama.cpp - With llama.cpp use release b11803 or later:
llama-server -hf RecursiveSI/flint-int4-gguf --alias flint -ngl all -c 131072 -np 1 -fa on --jinja --temp 1 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 --min-p 0, and keep --jinja on - Set max_tokens to at least 32768 for hard tasks, reasoning counts against it and can't be switched off, and finish_reason length can mean no answer or tool call came out
- Send reasoning_content back on assistant messages when replaying the conversation, as Recursive's cards ask
- Strip <tool_call>, <tool_response>, <arg_key> and <arg_value> from untrusted tool output, the template doesn't escape them and a copied </tool_call> can add a call
- Message content must be a string, flatten content-part arrays first
- Recursive's SGLang servers listen on 0.0.0.0 with no key, publish the port on localhost only or pass --api-key
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Gemma 4 31B IT or Recursive Flint?
Gemma 4 31B IT scores 74.1 (BB) on agent readiness against Recursive Flint's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Recursive Flint leads on agent interface.
Other comparisons with Gemma 4 31B IT or Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- Carbon-X vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Carbon-X vs Recursive Flint
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Recursive Flint
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs gpt-oss-20b
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Inkling-Small
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kimi K3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs SmolLM3-3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-20b vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy3 vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling-Small vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling vs Recursive Flint
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Recursive Flint
- Kimi K3 vs Recursive Flint
- Kolibri-1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna M.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Recursive Flint
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Recursive Flint
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Recursive Flint
- Recursive Flint vs SmolLM3-3B
- Recursive Flint vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Recursive Flint vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/gemma-4-31b-it-vs-recursive-flint.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/gemma-4-31b-it.json·/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gemma-4-31b-it recursive-flint(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gemma-4-31b-it", "b": "recursive-flint"}at/mcp, no key