Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.43/100
Margin
3.8pts
winning →
57.25/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) #97 (Supported); Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) and Gemini 2.5 Pro share 12 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning); 12 to Gemini 2.5 Pro.

Updated July 22, 2026
Shared results
12
DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) only
0
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
12
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) and Gemini 2.5 Pro is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 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.

Gemini 2.5 Pro is priced at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning). Gemini 2.5 Pro has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning).

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 scores and score margins for DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) and Gemini 2.5 Pro
CategoryDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)ΔGemini 2.5 Pro
CodingDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro63.8
KnowledgeDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro27.4
MathDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro11.6

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)$0 input / $0 outputGemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 outputDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Not availableGemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Not availableGemini 2.5 Pro21.19 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)128KGemini 2.5 Pro1MGemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 37.4%54.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 7.1%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 42.01%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 8.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 665Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-SciCodeSource 39.1%42.8%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 63.8%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 0.40%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-LCRSource 53.3%66.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
CritPtSource 2.0%2.6%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 20.7%25.8%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 77.9%84.4%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-HLESource 13.0%21.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -28.4%-14.3%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 28.8%39.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.3%87.4%DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) leads
GPQASource 83%Not comparable
HLESource 18.8%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 14.138%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 11521197Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 74.9%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)Gemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 41.5%48.7%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) and Gemini 2.5 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 DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) and Gemini 2.5 Pro today?

DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning): $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Gemini 2.5 Pro: $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 22, 2026

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.