Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 22 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) 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. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Gemini 3.1 Pro share 22 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 23 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max); 25 to Gemini 3.1 Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 22
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) only
- 23
- Gemini 3.1 Pro only
- 25
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) makes more sense if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; Gemini 3.1 Pro is the better fit if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 22 shared benchmark results across 6 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 V4 Flash (Max) and Gemini 3.1 Pro finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max). That is roughly 42.9x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 3.1 Pro is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
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 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Δ | Gemini 3.1 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)94.8 | Margin← 63.0 | Gemini 3.1 Pro31.8 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)63.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 ProNot measured |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)68.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 ProNot measured |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 Pro77.1 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)55.3 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.1 ProNot measured |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not 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 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | Gemini 3.1 Pro$2 input / $12 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | Gemini 3.1 Pro109 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | Gemini 3.1 Pro29.71 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)1M | Gemini 3.1 Pro1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 73.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 45.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 69% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1189 | 965 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 47.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 31.1% | 21.4% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95% | 95.6% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 34.4% | 23.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 831 | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 39.6% | 42.2% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 81.3% | 58.9% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA ITBenchSource | 31.5% | 30.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 22.9% | 16.5% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 35.6% | 53.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 32.0% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 56.87% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 13.3% | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 37.5% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 73.8% | Not comparable |
Coding10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 3052.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 79% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 73.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 56.2% | 68.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 44.9% | 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 |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 86.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 34.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 78.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 88.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 88.1% | 94.3% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| HLESource | 34.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.3% | 46.5% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 89.4% | 94.1% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 32.1% | 44.7% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -22.9% | 32.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.2% | 55.3% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 95.8% | 49.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 50.0% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 45.4% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 20.6% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 71.5% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 94.8% | — | Not comparable |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | 88.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | 33.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | 85.7% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | — | 36.900% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | — | 16.700% | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | — | 93.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1238 | 1281 | 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 |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 82.4% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 79.2% | 77.1% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Gemini 3.1 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Gemini 3.1 Pro are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Gemini 3.1 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 94.8 versus 31.8. Gemini 3.1 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.