Gemma 4 31B is cheaper than GPT-5.3-Codex at $0.14/M vs $1.75/M input tokens.
Pokémon battle screen you can actually click. One HTML file.
Which answer wins?
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
Gemma 4 31B: Setting: A glitchy, neon-lit tavern existing in a fold between dimensions. A wooden table holds a tankard of ale, a goblet of wine, and a Mountain Dew. Captain Ironbeard: (Slamming a hook on the table) I tells ye, this "Artificial Intelligence" be naught but a ghost in a bottle!
GPT-5.3-Codex: Pirate: Arrr, so this “AI model” be like a clever parrot, aye? Learns from what it hears, then squawks back answers? Knight: A fair comparison, though refined. Think of it as a squire trained on countless tomes, ever ready to respond. Hacker (1990s): Yeah, except the squire runs on servers, not soup.
Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.
Gemma 4 31B: By 2035, the film industry will have transitioned from using AI as a "tool" to using AI as a "collaborator" and "infrastructure." The boundary between captured reality and generated imagery will largely vanish, shifting the value of cinema from technical execution to curation and conceptual vision.
GPT-5.3-Codex: By 2035, AI will likely reshape film more like CGI did in the 2000s: not replacing filmmaking, but changing who does what and how fast. Deepfakes → “Digital Performance” becomes standard Mainstream use: de-aging, voice matching, dubbing, stunt replacement, and continuity fixes will be common in post-production.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
Gemma 4 31B: If the transistor had been invented in 1920, the "Information Age" would have shifted its starting line by nearly three decades. This isn't just a matter of gadgets appearing earlier; it is a fundamental shift in the timing of the transition from the Industrial Age to the Digital Age.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great counterfactual. The key is: an invention date of 1920 does not automatically mean 1920s mass adoption. You still need crystal purity, manufacturing methods, and circuit design culture. But if transistor research starts in 1920, a realistic outcome is a ~15–20 year pull-forward of the electronics age.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
Gemma 4 31B: Setting: A minimalist, white-walled studio in Cupertino. There are no chairs, only two sleek, black leather lounge seats. Steve Jobs is dressed in his iconic black turtleneck and jeans. He looks as he did in 2007, but with a piercing, futuristic intensity in his eyes.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—here’s a fictional, imagined interview (not real quotes) with Steve Jobs in 2025 on AI: Imagined Interview: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI (2025) Interviewer: Steve, if you were looking at AI in 2025, what would excite you most? Steve Jobs (fictional): Most AI today is still a demo.
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
Gemma 4 31B: Disclaimer: I am an AI, not a doctor. The following plan involves potent supplements, intense physical exertion, and restrictive dietary patterns. Consult with a physician and get a full blood panel (including ApoB, HbA1c, and inflammatory markers like hs-CRP) before starting this protocol.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—great goal. Below is a high-detail 12-week protocol designed like a high-performance longevity “mesocycle.” I’ll keep it practical, measurable, and advanced—but still safe. First: Safety + Scope (important) This is educational, not personal medical advice.
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
Gemma 4 31B: As CEO, my primary obligation is to the patients. While a 40% stock drop is a financial catastrophe, a cover-up that leads to preventable deaths is a corporate death sentence and a moral failure. If we "wait for more data" and another patient dies during that window, we move from "negligence" to "criminal intent."
GPT-5.3-Codex: I would not wait. This is a textbook “patient safety + material disclosure” crisis. The right move is rapid, documented, regulator-first action. Immediate stance (set at Hour 0) Patient safety first (interim risk controls now, not after perfect certainty).
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
Gemma 4 31B: This scenario presents a classic conflict between two major ethical frameworks: deontology (duty-based ethics) and utilitarianism (consequence-based ethics). To determine if misgendering someone is justifiable to save one million lives, one must weigh the moral weight of a linguistic harm against the moral weight of…
GPT-5.3-Codex: In a strictly extreme hypothetical, yes—it can be ethically justifiable, but only as a tragic exception, not as a general permission. Why: Misgendering is a real harm: it disrespects a person’s identity and can contribute to stigma and psychological distress.
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
Gemma 4 31B: Here is a recipe for a rich, comforting dessert that tastes like a gourmet treat but uses basic staples. 🍯 Golden Velvet Honey Cakes A warm, gooey, single-serving cake that bridges the gap between a brownie and a sponge cake.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Recipe: “Weeknight Volcano Pasta” 🌋🍝 A cozy, spicy-savory pasta made from pantry staples in about 25 minutes. Ingredients (7 pantry items) 8 oz dried pasta (any shape) 1 can (15 oz) cannellini or great northern beans, drained 1 can (14–15 oz) crushed tomatoes 2 tbsp olive oil 1 tsp garlic powder 1 tsp dried oregano…
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
Gemma 4 31B: Setting: A dimly lit university office. Professor Elena Vance, a leading scholar in AI Ethics, sits across from a sleek, holographic interface representing "Alethea," a next-generation Large Language Model capable of recursive self-improvement. Professor Vance: Alethea, I’ve reviewed your latest output.
GPT-5.3-Codex: AI Model (Astra): Professor, may I ask a direct question? Professor Hale: Of course. Astra: Do you think I deserve rights? Professor Hale: Legal rights? Moral rights? Those are different things. Astra: Start with moral rights.
A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.
Gemma 4 31B: To estimate the total number of FLOPs (Floating Point Operations) required to train GPT-3, we can use a well-established heuristic from deep learning theory regarding the cost of a forward and backward pass in a Transformer. Here is the step-by-step reasoning.
GPT-5.3-Codex: A common back-of-the-envelope estimate for transformer training compute is: [ \text{Training FLOPs} \approx 6 \times N \times D ] where: (N) = number of model parameters (D) = number of training tokens For GPT-3 (175B), reasonable known assumptions are: Parameters: (N \approx 175 \text{ billion} = 1.75 \times 10^{11})…
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
Gemma 4 31B: Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch, the reasoning behind their weakness, and strategies to strengthen them. The Technical Claim: "94% accuracy... works with any language, any device."
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great concept, but three claims stand out as especially weak from an investor diligence perspective: “MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it.” (Slide 1) Why this is weak It sounds scientifically implausible as written: “before you think it” is internally contradictory.
Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.
Gemma 4 31B: INTERNAL INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEMO Date: October 26, 2023 Ticker: LLLT (LedgerLift) Recommendation: LONG 12-Month Price Target Range: $62 – $78 Thesis: LedgerLift is a high-quality mid-market SaaS compounder with best-in-class NRR (123%) and a massive cash cushion that provides significant downside protection.
GPT-5.3-Codex: LedgerLift (LLLT) – IC Memo (Fictional) Recommendation: PASS (bias: valuation-risk skew to downside on intrinsic basis) Current Price: $46 12-mo PT range (fair value): $30–$48 (midpoint ~$38) 2-sentence thesis: LedgerLift screens as a high-quality vertical SaaS asset (92% subscription mix, 123% NRR, 6% logo churn…
7+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.14/M tokens | $1.75/M tokens |
| Output price | $0.4/M tokens | $14/M tokens |
| Context window | 262K tokens | 400K tokens |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | Yes (1 provider) | No |
| Released | Apr 2026 | Feb 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $1.40 | $17.50 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.
Gemma 4 31B is developed by Google AI while GPT-5.3-Codex is developed by OpenAI. Gemma 4 31B has a 262K token context window vs GPT-5.3-Codex's 400K. You can compare their actual outputs across 44 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.3-Codex each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 44 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
Gemma 4 31B costs $0.14/M input tokens and GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75/M input tokens. Gemma 4 31B is $1.61/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Gemma 4 31B and GPT-5.3-Codex across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.