Model comparison
Claude 4 Sonnet vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4 Sonnet #158 (Supported); Gemini 3.1 Pro #83 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4 Sonnet and Gemini 3.1 Pro share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude 4 Sonnet; 33 to Gemini 3.1 Pro.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Claude 4 Sonnet only
- 2
- Gemini 3.1 Pro only
- 33
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude 4 Sonnet and Gemini 3.1 Pro is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 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.
Claude 4 Sonnet is priced at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.1 Pro. Gemini 3.1 Pro has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4 Sonnet.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 4 Sonnet | Δ | Gemini 3.1 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4 Sonnet72.7 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 ProNot measured |
| Reasoning | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 Pro77.1 |
| Math | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 Pro31.8 |
| Multimodal | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 Pro82.6 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4 Sonnet | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4 Sonnet$3 input / $15 output | Gemini 3.1 Pro$2 input / $12 output | Gemini 3.1 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4 Sonnet40 tok/s | Gemini 3.1 Pro109 tok/s | Gemini 3.1 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4 Sonnet1.33 s | Gemini 3.1 Pro29.71 s | Claude 4 Sonnet reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4 Sonnet200K | Gemini 3.1 Pro1M | Gemini 3.1 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 52.3% | 95.6% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 39.66% | 56.87% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| JobBenchSource | 18.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 21.4% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 32.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 23.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 965 | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 13.3% | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 37.5% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 42.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 0.0% | 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 |
Coding6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 72.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 37.3% | 58.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | — | 82.9% | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | — | 78.9% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 32.03% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 68.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.5% | 46.5% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 68.3% | 94.1% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.0% | 44.7% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -9.2% | 32.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 22.4% | 55.3% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 40.8% | 49.9% | Claude 4 Sonnet leads |
| 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 |
Math2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | — | 93.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 62.4% | 82.4% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1178 | 1284 | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| 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 |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 45.4% | 77.1% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude 4 Sonnet 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 Claude 4 Sonnet and Gemini 3.1 Pro today?
Claude 4 Sonnet: $3.00 input / $15.00 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
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.