Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Gemini 3 Pro vs GPT-6 Astra
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GPT-6 Astra wins on 27/43 benchmarks
GPT-6 Astra wins 27 of 43 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed · agentic · reasoning.
Category leads
speed·GPT-6 Astraagentic·GPT-6 Astrareasoning·GPT-6 Astraknowledge·GPT-6 Astramath·GPT-6 Astrageneral·GPT-6 Astracoding·GPT-6 Astraarena·Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
#137 by perf·#5 by attention
Gemini 3 Pro
#71 by perf·#5 by attention
GPT-6 Astra
#9 by perf·#1 by attention
Best value
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
2.7x better value than GPT-6 Astra
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
6.9 pts/$
$7.00/M
Gemini 3 Pro
n/a
no price
GPT-6 Astra
2.6 pts/$
$30.00/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Google DeepMind
$4.20T·Tier 1
Google DeepMind
$4.20T·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
43 benchmarks · 3 models
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGemini 3 ProGPT-6 Astra
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
GPT-6 Astra leads by +11.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
29.7
Gemini 3 Pro
41.3
GPT-6 Astra
52.7
APEX-Agents
GPT-6 Astra leads by +29.4
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
35.3
Gemini 3 Pro
18.4
GPT-6 Astra
64.7
ARC-AGI
GPT-6 Astra leads by +0.5
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
98.0
Gemini 3 Pro
75.0
GPT-6 Astra
98.5
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-6 Astra leads by +17.9
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
77.1
Gemini 3 Pro
31.1
GPT-6 Astra
95.0
Balrog
GPT-6 Astra leads by +10.2
Balrog · benchmarks AI agents on text-based adventure games, testing language understanding, strategic planning, and long-horizon reasoning.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
57.0
Gemini 3 Pro
58.1
GPT-6 Astra
68.3
Chess Puzzles
GPT-6 Astra leads by +17.9
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
52.6
Gemini 3 Pro
27.4
GPT-6 Astra
70.5
GPQA diamond
GPT-6 Astra leads by +1.8
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
92.6
Gemini 3 Pro
90.2
GPT-6 Astra
94.4
HLE
GPT-6 Astra leads by +8.8
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
43.7
Gemini 3 Pro
34.4
GPT-6 Astra
52.5
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-6 Astra leads by +4.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.6
Gemini 3 Pro
91.4
GPT-6 Astra
100.0
Proofbench
GPT-6 Astra leads by +73.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.0
Gemini 3 Pro
20.0
GPT-6 Astra
99.0
SimpleQA Verified
GPT-6 Astra leads by +2.1
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
73.5
Gemini 3 Pro
72.9
GPT-6 Astra
75.6
WeirdML
GPT-6 Astra leads by +21.5
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
72.1
Gemini 3 Pro
69.9
GPT-6 Astra
93.6
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +23.6
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
21.4
Gemini 3 Pro
45.0
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +29.5
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
68.8
Gemini 3 Pro
39.4
Artificial Analysis · CritPt
GPT-6 Astra leads by +14.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
17.7
GPT-6 Astra
31.7
Artificial Analysis · GDPval
GPT-6 Astra leads by +38.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
13.8
GPT-6 Astra
52.1
Artificial Analysis · GPQA Diamond
GPT-6 Astra leads by +2.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
94.1
GPT-6 Astra
96.1
Artificial Analysis · Humanity's Last Exam
GPT-6 Astra leads by +7.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
47.0
GPT-6 Astra
54.7
Artificial Analysis · Long Context Reasoning
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
82.0
GPT-6 Astra
80.7
Artificial Analysis · MMMU Pro
GPT-6 Astra leads by +4.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
82.4
GPT-6 Astra
86.9
Artificial Analysis · SciCode
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +2.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
58.7
GPT-6 Astra
56.5
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +7.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1446.2
Gemini 3 Pro
1439.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1487.0
Gemini 3 Pro
1485.5
Cl Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +5.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
20.8
Gemini 3 Pro
15.8
DeepResearch Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.5
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
47.8
Gemini 3 Pro
46.3
Deepswe
GPT-6 Astra leads by +62.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
11.7
GPT-6 Astra
74.1
Dtbench
GPT-6 Astra leads by +0.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.1
GPT-6 Astra
95.5
Ebr Bench
GPT-6 Astra leads by +61.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
14.3
GPT-6 Astra
76.2
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +29.1
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
36.9
Gemini 3 Pro
66.0
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +14.6
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
16.7
Gemini 3 Pro
31.3
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
GPT-6 Astra leads by +70.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.8
GPT-6 Astra
97.6
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
GPT-6 Astra leads by +34.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
59.6
GPT-6 Astra
93.7
Furniture Assembly
GPT-6 Astra leads by +71.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
0.0
GPT-6 Astra
71.4
GSO-Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +3.9
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
22.6
Gemini 3 Pro
18.6
Lmca
GPT-6 Astra leads by +12.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
63.3
GPT-6 Astra
75.7
Metr Time Horizons
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +6.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
77.0
Gemini 3 Pro
71.0
Mirrorcode
GPT-6 Astra leads by +37.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
8.9
GPT-6 Astra
46.7
Mystery Game Puzzles
GPT-6 Astra leads by +55.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
27.3
GPT-6 Astra
82.4
PostTrainBench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +3.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
22.0
Gemini 3 Pro
18.1
Remote Labor Index
GPT-6 Astra leads by +19.6
Gemini 3 Pro
1.3
GPT-6 Astra
20.8
SimpleBench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +3.8
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
75.5
Gemini 3 Pro
71.7
SWE-Bench verified
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +2.7
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
75.6
Gemini 3 Pro
72.9
Terminal Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +10.8
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
80.2
Gemini 3 Pro
69.4
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Gemini 3 Pro | GPT-6 Astra |
|---|---|---|---|
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 29.7 | 41.3 | 52.7 |
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 35.3 | 18.4 | 64.7 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 98.0 | 75.0 | 98.5 |
ARC-AGI-2 ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data. | 77.1 | 31.1 | 95.0 |
Balrog Balrog · benchmarks AI agents on text-based adventure games, testing language understanding, strategic planning, and long-horizon reasoning. | 57.0 | 58.1 | 68.3 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 52.6 | 27.4 | 70.5 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 92.6 | 90.2 | 94.4 |
HLE HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%. | 43.7 | 34.4 | 52.5 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 95.6 | 91.4 | 100.0 |
Proofbench | 26.0 | 20.0 | 99.0 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 73.5 | 72.9 | 75.6 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 72.1 | 69.9 | 93.6 |
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?" | 21.4 | 45.0 | — |
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads. | 68.8 | 39.4 | — |
Artificial Analysis · CritPt | 17.7 | — | 31.7 |
Artificial Analysis · GDPval | 13.8 | — | 52.1 |
Artificial Analysis · GPQA Diamond | 94.1 | — | 96.1 |
Artificial Analysis · Humanity's Last Exam | 47.0 | — | 54.7 |
Artificial Analysis · Long Context Reasoning | 82.0 | — | 80.7 |
Artificial Analysis · MMMU Pro | 82.4 | — | 86.9 |
Artificial Analysis · SciCode | 58.7 | — | 56.5 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding | 1446.2 | 1439.0 | — |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall | 1487.0 | 1485.5 | — |
Cl Bench | 20.8 | 15.8 | — |
DeepResearch Bench DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses. | 47.8 | 46.3 | — |
Deepswe | 11.7 | — | 74.1 |
Dtbench | 95.1 | — | 95.5 |
Ebr Bench | 14.3 | — | 76.2 |
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 36.9 | 66.0 | — |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 16.7 | 31.3 | — |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private | 26.8 | — | 97.6 |
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private | 59.6 | — | 93.7 |
Furniture Assembly | 0.0 | — | 71.4 |
GSO-Bench GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues. | 22.6 | 18.6 | — |
Lmca | 63.3 | — | 75.7 |
Metr Time Horizons | 77.0 | 71.0 | — |
Mirrorcode | 8.9 | — | 46.7 |
Mystery Game Puzzles | 27.3 | — | 82.4 |
PostTrainBench | 22.0 | 18.1 | — |
Remote Labor Index | — | 1.3 | 20.8 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 75.5 | 71.7 | — |
SWE-Bench verified SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability. | 75.6 | 72.9 | — |
Terminal Bench Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence. | 80.2 | 69.4 | — |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2.00 | $12.00 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $45.00 | |
| — | — | — | — | |
| $10.00 | $50.00 | 1.1M tokens (~525 books) | $200.00 |