Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview wins on 18/24 benchmarks
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview wins 18 of 24 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed · arena · knowledge.
Category leads
speed·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewarena·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewknowledge·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewgeneral·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewmath·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewcoding·DeepSeek V4 Pro
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
DeepSeek V4 Pro
#89 by perf·#6 by attention
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
#137 by perf·#5 by attention
Best value
DeepSeek V4 Pro
25.0x better value than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
DeepSeek V4 Pro
172.1 pts/$
$0.31/M
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
6.9 pts/$
$7.00/M
Vendor risk
Mixed exposure
One or more vendors flagged
DeepSeek
$3.4B·Tier 1
Google DeepMind
$4.20T·Tier 1
Head to head
24 benchmarks · 2 models
DeepSeek V4 ProGemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +15.0
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?"
DeepSeek V4 Pro
36.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
21.4
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +9.5
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.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
59.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
68.8
Artificial Analysis · CritPt
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +0.3
DeepSeek V4 Pro
18.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
17.7
Artificial Analysis · GDPval
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +33.3
DeepSeek V4 Pro
47.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
13.8
Artificial Analysis · GPQA Diamond
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.3
DeepSeek V4 Pro
92.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
94.1
Artificial Analysis · Humanity's Last Exam
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +6.0
DeepSeek V4 Pro
41.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
47.0
Artificial Analysis · Long Context Reasoning
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.7
DeepSeek V4 Pro
80.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
82.0
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +6.3
DeepSeek V4 Pro
36.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
29.7
Artificial Analysis · SciCode
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +7.7
DeepSeek V4 Pro
51.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
58.7
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +0.2
DeepSeek V4 Pro
1446.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1446.2
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +29.2
DeepSeek V4 Pro
1457.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1487.0
Chess Puzzles
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +36.8
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
15.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
52.6
Cl Bench Life
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +3.4
DeepSeek V4 Pro
13.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
16.9
Dtbench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +10.7
DeepSeek V4 Pro
84.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.1
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +24.4
DeepSeek V4 Pro
2.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.8
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +14.4
DeepSeek V4 Pro
45.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
59.6
GPQA diamond
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +4.7
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
87.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
92.6
Lmca
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +14.9
DeepSeek V4 Pro
48.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
63.3
Mystery Game Puzzles
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +18.7
DeepSeek V4 Pro
8.6
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
27.3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +1.1
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
96.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.6
Proofbench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +10.0
DeepSeek V4 Pro
16.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.0
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +26.5
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
47.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
73.5
SWE-Bench verified
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +2.0
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.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
77.6
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
75.6
WeirdML
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +23.2
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
48.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
72.1
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
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?" | 36.4 | 21.4 |
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. | 59.4 | 68.8 |
Artificial Analysis · CritPt | 18.0 | 17.7 |
Artificial Analysis · GDPval | 47.1 | 13.8 |
Artificial Analysis · GPQA Diamond | 92.8 | 94.1 |
Artificial Analysis · Humanity's Last Exam | 41.0 | 47.0 |
Artificial Analysis · Long Context Reasoning | 80.3 | 82.0 |
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 36.0 | 29.7 |
Artificial Analysis · SciCode | 51.0 | 58.7 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding | 1446.0 | 1446.2 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall | 1457.8 | 1487.0 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 15.8 | 52.6 |
Cl Bench Life | 13.5 | 16.9 |
Dtbench | 84.5 | 95.1 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private | 2.4 | 26.8 |
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private | 45.3 | 59.6 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 87.9 | 92.6 |
Lmca | 48.5 | 63.3 |
Mystery Game Puzzles | 8.6 | 27.3 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 96.7 | 95.6 |
Proofbench | 16.0 | 26.0 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 47.0 | 73.5 |
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. | 77.6 | 75.6 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 48.9 | 72.1 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $0.21 | $0.42 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $2.61 | |
| $2.00 | $12.00 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $45.00 |