Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Opus 4.6
87
Gemini 3.1 Pro
92
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.6 #6 · Gemini 3.1 Pro unranked
Pick Gemini 3.1 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.6 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Multimodal
+5.5 difference
Claude Opus 4.6
Gemini 3.1 Pro
$5 / $25
$2 / $12
40 t/s
109 t/s
1.78s
29.71s
1M
1M
Pick Gemini 3.1 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.6 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 92 to 87. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3.1 Pro's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 82.8 against 77.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MMMU-Pro, 77.3% to 83.9%.
Claude Opus 4.6 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.1 Pro. That is roughly 2.1x on output cost alone.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 92 to 87. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMMU-Pro, where the scores are 77.3% and 83.9%.
Gemini 3.1 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.8 versus 77.3. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.