Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs GPT-5.4

Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.

Winner summary

GPT-5.4 wins 20 of 34 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed · agentic · general.

Category leads
speed·GPT-5.4agentic·GPT-5.4reasoning·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewarena·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewknowledge·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewgeneral·GPT-5.4coding·GPT-5.4math·GPT-5.4
Hype vs Reality
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
#146 by perf·#9 by attention
DESERVED
GPT-5.4
#110 by perf·#8 by attention
DESERVED
Best value
1.1x better value than GPT-5.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
6.9 pts/$
$7.00/M
GPT-5.4
6.0 pts/$
$8.75/M
Vendor risk
Google DeepMind logo
Google DeepMind
$3.44T·Tier 1
Low risk
OpenAI logo
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
Head to head
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGPT-5.4
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
GPT-5.4 leads by +48.0
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
GPT-5.4
69.4
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +11.6
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
GPT-5.4
57.3
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
GPT-5.4 leads by +27.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
29.7
GPT-5.4
57.2
APEX-Agents
GPT-5.4 leads by +17.1
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
GPT-5.4
52.4
ARC-AGI
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +4.3
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
GPT-5.4
93.7
ARC-AGI-2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +3.1
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
GPT-5.4
74.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +51.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1446.2
GPT-5.4
1395.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +22.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1487.0
GPT-5.4
1464.8
Chess Puzzles
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +7.4
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
GPT-5.4
45.3
Cl Bench
GPT-5.4 leads by +7.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
20.8
GPT-5.4
27.9
Cl Bench Life
GPT-5.4 leads by +4.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
16.9
GPT-5.4
21.7
DeepResearch Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +12.7
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
GPT-5.4
35.1
Deepswe
GPT-5.4 leads by +40.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
11.7
GPT-5.4
51.8
Dtbench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +4.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.1
GPT-5.4
90.7
Ebr Bench
GPT-5.4 leads by +11.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
14.3
GPT-5.4
25.4
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5.4 leads by +10.7
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
GPT-5.4
47.6
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
GPT-5.4 leads by +10.4
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
GPT-5.4
27.1
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
GPT-5.4 leads by +22.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.8
GPT-5.4
49.0
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
GPT-5.4 leads by +18.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
59.6
GPT-5.4
78.6
Furniture Assembly
GPT-5.4 leads by +10.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
0.0
GPT-5.4
10.7
GPQA diamond
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.5
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
GPT-5.4
91.1
GSO-Bench
GPT-5.4 leads by +8.8
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
GPT-5.4
31.4
HLE
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +10.7
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
GPT-5.4
33.0
Lmca
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +2.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
63.3
GPT-5.4
61.1
Metr Time Horizons
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +2.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
77.0
GPT-5.4
74.3
Mirrorcode
GPT-5.4 leads by +6.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
8.9
GPT-5.4
15.6
Mystery Game Puzzles
GPT-5.4 leads by +3.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
27.3
GPT-5.4
30.6
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5.4 leads by +2.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.6
GPT-5.4
97.8
PostTrainBench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +3.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
22.0
GPT-5.4
19.0
Proofbench
GPT-5.4 leads by +30.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.0
GPT-5.4
56.0
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +28.7
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
GPT-5.4
44.8
SWE-Bench verified
GPT-5.4 leads by +1.2
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
GPT-5.4
76.9
Terminal Bench
GPT-5.4 leads by +1.6
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
GPT-5.4
81.8
WeirdML
GPT-5.4 leads by +5.6
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
GPT-5.4
77.7
Full benchmark table
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGPT-5.4
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?"
21.469.4
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.
68.857.3
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
29.757.2
APEX-Agents
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
35.352.4
ARC-AGI
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
98.093.7
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.
77.174.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
1446.21395.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
1487.01464.8
Chess Puzzles
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
52.645.3
Cl Bench
20.827.9
Cl Bench Life
16.921.7
DeepResearch Bench
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
47.835.1
Deepswe
11.751.8
Dtbench
95.190.7
Ebr Bench
14.325.4
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.
36.947.6
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.
16.727.1
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
26.849.0
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
59.678.6
Furniture Assembly
0.010.7
GPQA diamond
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
92.691.1
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.
22.631.4
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%.
43.733.0
Lmca
63.361.1
Metr Time Horizons
77.074.3
Mirrorcode
8.915.6
Mystery Game Puzzles
27.330.6
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
95.697.8
PostTrainBench
22.019.0
Proofbench
26.056.0
SimpleQA Verified
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
73.544.8
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.
75.676.9
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.
80.281.8
WeirdML
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
72.177.7
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
ModelInputOutputContextProjected $/mo
Google DeepMind logoGemini 3.1 Pro Preview$2.00$12.001.0M tokens (~524 books)$45.00
OpenAI logoGPT-5.4$2.50$15.001.1M tokens (~525 books)$56.25