Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning)
Results updated 11 November 2026 · Both in Terminus-2 · How we benchmark
Verdict
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) clearly beats Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning) by 42 points, and is faster; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning) is cheaper.
- Cost per task
- $0.015 vs $0.013
- Time per task
- 2.1 min vs 4.8 min
- Tokens per attempt
- 93k vs 273k
- Image input
- Yes vs No
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 scores higher than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 on all 3 evaluations scored for both. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 is cheaper ($0.013 against $0.015 per task), but Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 is faster (2.1 min against 4.8 min).
Where they differ most
By kind of work, share of tasks passed, 0 to 100 · Higher is better
| Kind of work | Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning) | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Remote sensing and raster analysis | 59 | 8 |
| GIS analysis | 56 | 7 |
| Making maps | 70 | 30 |
| Climate and time series | 47 | 14 |
Where the tasks are set: each kind of work links to its tasks and scoresCharts for each: Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2.
Side by side
| Metric | Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index: Text only | 55 | 13 |
| Geospatial Agent Index: Text + vision | No data | No data |
| Earth-Bench V2 score | 44 | 16 |
| GeoBenchX score | 61 | 20 |
| GS-QA2 score | 61 | 4 |
| Vision agents score | No data | No data |
| GeoAgentBench score (Guided workflows; not in the Agent Index) | 83 | 10 |
| GeoAnalystBench score (Guided workflows; not in the Agent Index) | 63 | 32 |
| OGD4All score (standalone; in no index) | 85 | 90 |
| GeoNatureAgent score (standalone; in no index) | 100 | 64 |
| MultiGlobeQA score (standalone; in no index) | 30 | 68 |
| GeoAgentEval score (standalone; in no index) | 88 | 36 |
| ImpactMesh score (standalone; in no index) | No data | No data |
| Remote sensing and raster analysis score | 59 | 8 |
| Change detection score | 52 | 24 |
| GIS analysis score | 56 | 7 |
| Climate and time series score | 47 | 14 |
| Making maps score | 70 | 30 |
| Cost per task | $0.015 | $0.013 |
| Time per task (at 100 output tokens/s) | 2.1 min | 4.8 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 93k | 273k |
| Turns per attempt | 9.0 | 18.7 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $0.17 | $0.060 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $0.40 | $0.20 |
| Context window | 262,144 | 262,144 |
| Image input | Yes | No |
| Developer | NVIDIA |
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2?
Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2, 55 to 13.
Which is cheaper per task, Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2, $0.013 to $0.015.
Which writes fewer output tokens per task, Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2, 7k to 8k.
Which has the larger context window, Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B (Reasoning), Terminus-2?
They are level, at 262,144 tokens.