Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Gemini 3 Pro vs o3
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Gemini 3 Pro wins on 24/28 benchmarks
Gemini 3 Pro wins 24 of 28 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed · agentic · reasoning.
Category leads
speed·Gemini 3 Proagentic·Gemini 3 Proreasoning·Gemini 3 Proknowledge·Gemini 3 Progeneral·Gemini 3 Promath·Gemini 3 Procoding·Gemini 3 Prolanguage·Gemini 3 Pro
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Gemini 3 Pro
#71 by perf·#6 by attention
o3
#111 by perf·no signal
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Google DeepMind
$4.20T·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
28 benchmarks · 2 models
Gemini 3 Proo3
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +9.0
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 Pro
45.0
o3
36.1
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +1.0
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 Pro
39.4
o3
38.4
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +21.1
Gemini 3 Pro
41.3
o3
20.2
APEX-Agents
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +1.2
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Gemini 3 Pro
18.4
o3
17.2
ARC-AGI
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +14.2
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Gemini 3 Pro
75.0
o3
60.8
ARC-AGI-2
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +24.6
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 Pro
31.1
o3
6.5
Chess Puzzles
o3 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 Pro
27.4
o3
34.8
Cl Bench
o3 leads by +2.0
Gemini 3 Pro
15.8
o3
17.8
DeepResearch Bench
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +1.1
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
Gemini 3 Pro
46.3
o3
45.2
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +47.3
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Gemini 3 Pro
66.0
o3
18.7
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +27.8
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 Pro
31.3
o3
3.5
Gdpval
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +9.5
Gemini 3 Pro
40.3
o3
30.8
GeoBench
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +10.0
GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding.
Gemini 3 Pro
84.0
o3
74.0
GPQA diamond
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +14.4
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Gemini 3 Pro
90.2
o3
75.8
GSO-Bench
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +9.8
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 Pro
18.6
o3
8.8
HELM · GPQA
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +5.0
Gemini 3 Pro
80.3
o3
75.3
HELM · IFEval
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +0.7
Gemini 3 Pro
87.6
o3
86.9
HELM · MMLU-Pro
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +4.4
Gemini 3 Pro
90.3
o3
85.9
HELM · Omni-MATH
o3 leads by +15.8
Gemini 3 Pro
55.6
o3
71.4
HELM · WildBench
o3 leads by +0.2
Gemini 3 Pro
85.9
o3
86.1
HLE
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +18.1
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 Pro
34.4
o3
16.3
Metr Time Horizons
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +5.5
Gemini 3 Pro
71.0
o3
65.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +6.9
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Gemini 3 Pro
91.4
o3
84.4
SimpleBench
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +28.0
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Gemini 3 Pro
71.7
o3
43.7
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +23.5
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Gemini 3 Pro
72.9
o3
49.4
SWE-Bench verified
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +10.6
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 Pro
72.9
o3
62.3
VPCT
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +58.5
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
Gemini 3 Pro
86.5
o3
28.0
WeirdML
Gemini 3 Pro leads by +17.5
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Gemini 3 Pro
69.9
o3
52.4
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
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?" | 45.0 | 36.1 |
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. | 39.4 | 38.4 |
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 41.3 | 20.2 |
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 18.4 | 17.2 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 75.0 | 60.8 |
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. | 31.1 | 6.5 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 27.4 | 34.8 |
Cl Bench | 15.8 | 17.8 |
DeepResearch Bench DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses. | 46.3 | 45.2 |
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. | 66.0 | 18.7 |
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. | 31.3 | 3.5 |
Gdpval | 40.3 | 30.8 |
GeoBench GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding. | 84.0 | 74.0 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 90.2 | 75.8 |
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. | 18.6 | 8.8 |
HELM · GPQA | 80.3 | 75.3 |
HELM · IFEval | 87.6 | 86.9 |
HELM · MMLU-Pro | 90.3 | 85.9 |
HELM · Omni-MATH | 55.6 | 71.4 |
HELM · WildBench | 85.9 | 86.1 |
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%. | 34.4 | 16.3 |
Metr Time Horizons | 71.0 | 65.4 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 91.4 | 84.4 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 71.7 | 43.7 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 72.9 | 49.4 |
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. | 72.9 | 62.3 |
VPCT VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations. | 86.5 | 28.0 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 69.9 | 52.4 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| — | — | — | — | |
| $2.00 | $8.00 | 200K tokens (~100 books) | $35.00 |