Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
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
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
#137 by perf·#8 by attention
DeepSeek V4 Pro
#89 by perf·#5 by attention
Best value
DeepSeek V4 Pro
25.0x better value than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
6.9 pts/$
$7.00/M
DeepSeek V4 Pro
172.1 pts/$
$0.31/M
Vendor risk
Mixed exposure
One or more vendors flagged
Google DeepMind
$4.20T·Tier 1
DeepSeek
$3.4B·Tier 1
Head to head
24 benchmarks · 2 models
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewDeepSeek V4 Pro
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?"
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
21.4
DeepSeek V4 Pro
36.4
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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
68.8
DeepSeek V4 Pro
59.4
Artificial Analysis · CritPt
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +0.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
17.7
DeepSeek V4 Pro
18.0
Artificial Analysis · GDPval
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +33.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
13.8
DeepSeek V4 Pro
47.1
Artificial Analysis · GPQA Diamond
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
94.1
DeepSeek V4 Pro
92.8
Artificial Analysis · Humanity's Last Exam
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +6.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
47.0
DeepSeek V4 Pro
41.0
Artificial Analysis · Long Context Reasoning
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
82.0
DeepSeek V4 Pro
80.3
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads by +6.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
29.7
DeepSeek V4 Pro
36.0
Artificial Analysis · SciCode
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +7.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
58.7
DeepSeek V4 Pro
51.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +0.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1446.2
DeepSeek V4 Pro
1446.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +29.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1487.0
DeepSeek V4 Pro
1457.8
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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
52.6
DeepSeek V4 Pro
15.8
Cl Bench Life
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +3.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
16.9
DeepSeek V4 Pro
13.5
Dtbench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +10.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.1
DeepSeek V4 Pro
84.5
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +24.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.8
DeepSeek V4 Pro
2.4
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +14.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
59.6
DeepSeek V4 Pro
45.3
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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
92.6
DeepSeek V4 Pro
87.9
Lmca
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +14.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
63.3
DeepSeek V4 Pro
48.5
Mystery Game Puzzles
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +18.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
27.3
DeepSeek V4 Pro
8.6
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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.6
DeepSeek V4 Pro
96.7
Proofbench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +10.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.0
DeepSeek V4 Pro
16.0
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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
73.5
DeepSeek V4 Pro
47.0
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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
75.6
DeepSeek V4 Pro
77.6
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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
72.1
DeepSeek V4 Pro
48.9
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | DeepSeek V4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
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 | 36.4 |
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. | 68.8 | 59.4 |
Artificial Analysis · CritPt | 17.7 | 18.0 |
Artificial Analysis · GDPval | 13.8 | 47.1 |
Artificial Analysis · GPQA Diamond | 94.1 | 92.8 |
Artificial Analysis · Humanity's Last Exam | 47.0 | 41.0 |
Artificial Analysis · Long Context Reasoning | 82.0 | 80.3 |
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 29.7 | 36.0 |
Artificial Analysis · SciCode | 58.7 | 51.0 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding | 1446.2 | 1446.0 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall | 1487.0 | 1457.8 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 52.6 | 15.8 |
Cl Bench Life | 16.9 | 13.5 |
Dtbench | 95.1 | 84.5 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private | 26.8 | 2.4 |
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private | 59.6 | 45.3 |
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 | 87.9 |
Lmca | 63.3 | 48.5 |
Mystery Game Puzzles | 27.3 | 8.6 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 95.6 | 96.7 |
Proofbench | 26.0 | 16.0 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 73.5 | 47.0 |
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 | 77.6 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 72.1 | 48.9 |
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 | |
| $0.21 | $0.42 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $2.61 |