Model comparison
Celeris-1 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Celeris-1 unranked (Not scored); Gemini 3.1 Pro #83 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and Gemini 3.1 Pro share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Celeris-1; 48 to Gemini 3.1 Pro.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Celeris-1 only
- 1
- Gemini 3.1 Pro only
- 48
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Celeris-1 and Gemini 3.1 Pro is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is priced at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens for Celeris-1. Gemini 3.1 Pro has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 8K for Celeris-1.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Celeris-1$2 input / $6 output | Gemini 3.1 Pro$2 input / $12 output | Celeris-1 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Celeris-1Not available | Gemini 3.1 Pro109 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Celeris-1Not available | Gemini 3.1 Pro29.71 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Celeris-18K | Gemini 3.1 Pro1M | Gemini 3.1 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 95.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 21.4% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 32.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 23.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 965 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 56.87% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 13.3% | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 37.5% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 42.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 58.9% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 30.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 16.5% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 53.8% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 73.8% | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 75.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 94.3% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 45.4% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 20.6% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 71.5% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 46.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 94.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 32.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 55.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 49.9% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | — | 93.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 83.9% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 80.2% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 69.4% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 72.4% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 29.0% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 81.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 82.4% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1281 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 77.1% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Celeris-1 and Gemini 3.1 Pro on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Celeris-1 and Gemini 3.1 Pro today?
Celeris-1: $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens Gemini 3.1 Pro: $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.