Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

DeepSeek V3.2 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

55.4/100
Margin
0.1pts
← winning
55.3/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.2 #82 (Supported); Gemini 3.1 Pro #83 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Pro share 17 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to DeepSeek V3.2; 30 to Gemini 3.1 Pro.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
17
DeepSeek V3.2 only
2
Gemini 3.1 Pro only
30
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V3.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.1 Pro only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V3.2 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 55.4 versus 55.3. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Gemini 3.1 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.28 input / $0.42 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V3.2. That is roughly 28.6x on output cost alone. Gemini 3.1 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for DeepSeek V3.2.

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 V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Pro
CategoryDeepSeek V3.2ΔGemini 3.1 Pro
MathDeepSeek V3.217.1Margin→ 14.7Gemini 3.1 Pro31.8
CodingDeepSeek V3.260.9MarginNo overlapGemini 3.1 ProNot measured
ReasoningDeepSeek V3.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.1 Pro77.1
MultimodalDeepSeek V3.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.1 Pro82.6

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · DeepSeek V3.2B · Gemini 3.1 Pro

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 22.100%B 36.900%
    Winner: Gemini 3.1 ProΔ 14.8
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): DeepSeek V3.2 scored 22.100%; Gemini 3.1 Pro scored 36.900%. Gemini 3.1 Pro wins this benchmark.

  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 2.100%B 16.700%
    Winner: Gemini 3.1 ProΔ 14.6
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): DeepSeek V3.2 scored 2.100%; Gemini 3.1 Pro scored 16.700%. Gemini 3.1 Pro wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V3.2$0.28 input / $0.42 outputGemini 3.1 Pro$2 input / $12 outputDeepSeek V3.2 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V3.235 tok/sGemini 3.1 Pro109 tok/sGemini 3.1 Pro has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V3.23.75 sGemini 3.1 Pro29.71 sDeepSeek V3.2 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V3.2128KGemini 3.1 Pro1MGemini 3.1 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
Claw-EvalSource 40.2%57.8%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
VITA-BenchSource 18.5%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 78.9%95.6%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
Gert LabsSource 29.57%56.87%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
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 —965Not 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
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
SWE-RebenchSource 60.9%—Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 71.5%78.9%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-SciCodeSource 38.7%58.9%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
LiveCodeBench ProSource —82.9%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource —32.03%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —68.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
AA-LCRSource 39.0%72.7%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
CritPtSource 0.9%17.7%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
ARC-AGI-2Source —77.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 24.7%46.5%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 75.1%94.1%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-HLESource 10.5%44.7%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -46.7%32.9%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 24.2%55.3%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 93.5%49.9%Gemini 3.1 Pro 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
MathGemini 3.1 Pro wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 22.100%36.900%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 2.100%16.700%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
Multilingual
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource —93.2%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12061284Gemini 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
AA-MMMU-ProSource —82.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 49.0%77.1%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, DeepSeek V3.2 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

DeepSeek V3.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.4 to 55.3. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 22.100% and 36.900%.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V3.2 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Gemini 3.1 Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 31.8 versus 17.1. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

DeepSeek Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 20, 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.