Google's fourth-generation open dense model with native multimodal understanding.
Xiaomi's open-source efficiency model: a 309B MoE with 15B active parameters per token and a hybrid attention mechanism.
No shared demos for these models yet.
No captured outputs for these models yet.
Both Gemma 4 31B and MiMo V2.6 Flash are capable AI models. The best choice depends on your specific use case: consider pricing, context window, speed, and which capabilities (vision, reasoning, audio) you need.
MiMo V2.6 Flash has a lower blended cost. Gemma 4 31B: $0.20 input / $0.40 output. MiMo V2.6 Flash: $0.14 input / $0.28 output.
MiMo V2.6 Flash has a larger context window: Gemma 4 31B supports 262K tokens vs MiMo V2.6 Flash at 1M tokens.
Yes, both Gemma 4 31B and MiMo V2.6 Flash support vision/image input.
Gemma 4 31B and MiMo V2.6 Flash have similar overall capabilities. The main differences lie in pricing, context window size, and provider-specific strengths. Use this comparison page to review all metrics side by side.
If cost is your priority, choose the cheaper option. If you need the highest intelligence for complex tasks, pick the higher-scoring model. For long documents or codebases, choose the larger context window. You can try both Gemma 4 31B and MiMo V2.6 Flash for free on idapt.app to see which performs better for your specific needs.