OpenAI compatible API · Attested · Public status

Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 vs Google: Gemma 4 31B

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Google: Gemma 4 31B: compare current API pricing, context, provider routes, privacy, p50 latency, and OpenAI-compatible access.

Verify gateway

Onebase URL to migrate

100sof models and routes

0prompt or output logs. Always.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

Google: Gemma 4 31B has the lower cheapest prompt+completion route on TrustedRouter. Google: Gemma 4 31B has more provider fallback routes, while Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 has the larger context window. Current TrustedRouter probes show Google: Gemma 4 31B with the lower p50 TTFT.

$31.65/1MAnthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 cheapest route

$0.5064/1MGoogle: Gemma 4 31B cheapest route

2888 msAnthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 fastest measured p50 TTFT via anthropic

1035 msGoogle: Gemma 4 31B fastest measured p50 TTFT via digitalocean

Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6Google: Gemma 4 31B

Model idanthropic/claude-opus-4.6google/gemma-4-31b-it

Publisher Anthropic Google AI Studio

AI IQ IQ 125#11 IQ 101#75

Context1,000,000 tokens262,144 tokens

Provider routes327

Cheapest route$31.65/1M$0.5064/1M

Privacy postureprovider posture varieshas provider E2EE route

Fastest measured p50 TTFT2888 ms via anthropic1035 ms via digitalocean

Highest measured throughputnot enough data91 tok/s via sambanova

Recent route uptime range100.00%100.00%

Modes chat messages chat

Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 routes

Overview3 endpoints
PricingPrompt and completion rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Google: Gemma 4 31B routes

Overview27 endpoints
PricingPrompt and completion rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

Google: Gemma 4 31B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.279 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 4 31B vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K364 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs Google: Gemma 4 31B60 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 4 31B vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.658 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 4 31B vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b58 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs Google: Gemma 4 31B56 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 vs Google: Gemma 4 31B55 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 4 31B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.150 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="anthropic/claude-opus-4.6",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 or Google: Gemma 4 31B?

Is Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 or Google: Gemma 4 31B cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $31.65/1M for Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 and $0.5064/1M for Google: Gemma 4 31B. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 or Google: Gemma 4 31B faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 2888 ms for Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 and 1035 ms for Google: Gemma 4 31B. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 and Google: Gemma 4 31B with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between anthropic/claude-opus-4.6 and google/gemma-4-31b-it. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.