Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Gemini 3 Pro
Gemini 3 Pro has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
dots3-note Preview vs Gemini 3 Pro
Updated November 13, 2026. Rank says dots3-note Preview is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Share or export
Decision reading
dots3-note Preview has the higher public point estimate, 62.77 versus 58.35. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 5 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
- API price per 1M tokens
dots3-note Preview: No comparable API price
Gemini 3 Pro: $2 input / $12 output
- Context window
dots3-note Preview: 512K
Gemini 3 Pro: 2M
- Released
dots3-note Preview: August 14, 2026
Gemini 3 Pro: November 18, 2025
- Shared results
- 5
- dots3-note Preview only
- 26
- Gemini 3 Pro only
- 27
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Estimated: dots3-note Preview · Supported: Gemini 3 Pro. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Dots3-note Preview is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limitedAgentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Gemini 3 Pro is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limitedChat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-ratesCache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: rate-fallbackRepository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
—dots3-note Preview43.3Gemini 3 Pro
Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8
The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
Same basis rules as the category table below
Or describe your own job
The LLM Selector reads what you need a model for and returns a shortlist, ranked in the same order the job pages publish.
Describe the task and constraints. This selector recommends models; it cannot carry out the task or access your files and accounts.
We keep what you type here, drafts included, for 180 days, and after that only the job and requirements read from it. Nothing is tied to your IP address or account. Leave out names and other personal details. Privacy
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
26 dots3-note Preview only
5 Shared
27 Gemini 3 Pro only
2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
ARC-AGI-2Reasoning
Normalized gap 50.3dots3-note Preview:81.4%Gemini 3 Pro:31.1%MMMU-ProMultimodal
Normalized gap 1.9dots3-note Preview:79.1%Gemini 3 Pro:81%
Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Multimodal
Directional only- dots3-note Preview
- 65.0
- Estimated · #28/67
- Gemini 3 Pro
- 58.7
- Estimated · #40/67
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 10 vs 22 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Instruction following
Directional only- dots3-note Preview
- 89.1
- #35/157
- Gemini 3 Pro
- 86.1
- #48/157
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Agentic
Not comparable- dots3-note Preview
- 57.8
- Estimated · #38/135
- Gemini 3 Pro
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 9 vs 2 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Coding
Not comparable- dots3-note Preview
- Not ranked
- Gemini 3 Pro
- 43.3
- Estimated · #69/162
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 4 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- dots3-note Preview
- Not ranked
- Gemini 3 Pro
- 48.7
- Supported · #54/160
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 2 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- dots3-note Preview
- Not ranked
- Gemini 3 Pro
- 62.1
- Supported · #40/180
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 2 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- dots3-note Preview
- Not ranked
- Gemini 3 Pro
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- dots3-note Preview
- Not ranked
- Gemini 3 Pro
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | dots3-note Preview | Gemini 3 Pro | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | 65.0Estimated · #28/67 | 58.7Estimated · #40/67 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 10 vs 22 public rows | Directional only |
| Instruction following | 89.1#35/157 | 86.1#48/157 | Directional onlyProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows | Directional only |
| Agentic | 57.8Estimated · #38/135 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 9 vs 2 public rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | Not ranked | 43.3Estimated · #69/162 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 4 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not ranked | 48.7Supported · #54/160 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 2 public rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | Not ranked | 62.1Supported · #40/180 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 2 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- dots3-note Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Gemini 3 Pro
- $0.008
- Fits in one request
dots3-note Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- dots3-note Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Gemini 3 Pro
- $0.136
- Fits in one request
dots3-note Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- dots3-note Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
- Gemini 3 Pro
- $0.56
- Fits in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Gemini 3 Pro has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. dots3-note Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished
Price against score, among all priced models
Overall score against output price per 1M tokens, one model per family. Pricing as of November 12, 2026.
Gemini 3 Pro
- dots3-note Preview has no public API price, so it is not plotted.
- 17 models score at least as high as Gemini 3 Pro for the same price or less. The nearest is Gemini 3.1 Pro (score 63.1, also $12.00 per 1M output tokens).
Gray dots are the other priced models. The dark step line is the efficiency frontier: for a model under it, another model costs no more and scores at least as high.
See Gemini 3 Pro on the full price vs performance chartSpecification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
Specificationdots3-note PreviewGemini 3 Pro
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
dots3-note Preview
Gemini 3 Pro
2M
API model ID
dots3-note Preview
Not sourced
Gemini 3 Pro
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
dots3-note Preview
No comparable hosted API rate
dots3-note Preview model cardGemini 3 Pro
Not published
Documented inputs
dots3-note Preview
text, image, video, audio
dots3-note-prev model cardGemini 3 Pro
text, image, video, audio, pdf
Gemini API model page for gemini-3-pro-previewDocumented outputs
dots3-note Preview
Gemini 3 Pro
Provider availability
dots3-note Preview
Not sourced
Gemini 3 Pro
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
dots3-note Preview
Reasoning
Gemini 3 Pro
Non-Reasoning
Weight access
dots3-note Preview
Open Weight
Gemini 3 Pro
Proprietary
License
dots3-note Preview
Open Weight
Gemini 3 Pro
Proprietary
Release date
dots3-note Preview
2026-08-14
Gemini 3 Pro
2025-11-18
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- dots3-note Preview has the higher public point estimate, 62.77 versus 58.35. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Gemini 3 Pro has the larger documented window (2M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Questions
Which is better, dots3-note Preview or Gemini 3 Pro?
dots3-note Preview has the higher public point estimate, 62.77 versus 58.35. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, dots3-note Preview or Gemini 3 Pro?
Dots3-note Preview is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Which is better for agentic tasks, dots3-note Preview or Gemini 3 Pro?
Gemini 3 Pro is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.
Which costs less, dots3-note Preview or Gemini 3 Pro?
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Which has the larger context window, dots3-note Preview or Gemini 3 Pro?
Gemini 3 Pro has the larger documented context window: 2M, compared with 512K.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
dots3-note Preview
API / moNo API price on file
Self-host / mo$13,981
Break-even—
Gemini 3 Pro
API / mo$10,500
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence58 rows
Agentic
Claw-Eval
dots3-note Preview73.4%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
dots3-note Preview75.1%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
dots3-note Preview55.6%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
skillsBench
dots3-note Preview52.8%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
APEX-Agents
dots3-note Preview30.8%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
BrowseComp
dots3-note Preview83.3%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
dots3-note Preview52.6%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
DeepSearchQA
dots3-note Preview92.1%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
WideResearch
dots3-note Preview78.9%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
Gert Labs
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro63.23%SourceNot directly comparable
JobBench
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro11.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Codeforces
dots3-note Preview3056.0SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
dots3-note Preview91.5%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
dots3-note Preview75.1%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
dots3-note Preview78.4%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
dots3-note Preview75.7%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
dots3-note Preview61%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
dots3-note Preview49.8%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
Vibe Code Bench
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro14.30%SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro86.4%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench (Vals)
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro76.4%SourceNot directly comparable
PostTrainBench v1
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro18.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Multimodal
SimpleVQA
dots3-note Preview72.5%SourceGemini 3 Pro73.2%SourceGemini 3 Pro leads this result
MMMU-Pro
dots3-note Preview79.1%SourceGemini 3 Pro81%SourceGemini 3 Pro leads this result
MathVision
dots3-note Preview87.7%SourceGemini 3 Pro86.6%Sourcedots3-note Preview leads this result
ZeroBench
dots3-note Preview19.0%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
CharXiv w/o tools
dots3-note Preview83.1%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
GDP.pdf (no tools)
dots3-note Preview60.7%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
PerceptionBench
dots3-note Preview53.4%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
BabyVision
dots3-note Preview50.0%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
MMVU
dots3-note Preview79.9%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
VideoMMMU
dots3-note Preview86.8%SourceGemini 3 Pro87.6%SourceGemini 3 Pro leads this result
MMMU
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro87.2%SourceNot directly comparable
RealWorldQA
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro83.3%SourceNot directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro88.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro88.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro87.7%SourceNot directly comparable
We-Math
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro86.9%SourceNot directly comparable
DynaMath
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro85.1%SourceNot directly comparable
MMLongBench-Doc
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro60.5%SourceNot directly comparable
CC-OCR
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro79.0%SourceNot directly comparable
AI2D_TEST
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro94.1%SourceNot directly comparable
CountBench
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro97.3%SourceNot directly comparable
RefCOCO (avg)
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro84.1%SourceNot directly comparable
ODINW13
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro46.3%SourceNot directly comparable
ERQA
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro70.5%SourceNot directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro83.0%SourceNot directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro72.7%SourceNot directly comparable
CharXiv
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro81.4%SourceNot directly comparable
V*
dots3-note Preview—Gemini 3 Pro88.0%SourceNot directly comparable
Knowledge
Instruction following
Math
IMOAnswerBench
dots3-note Preview90.9%SourceGemini 3 Pro—Not directly comparable
58 public results · 5 shared
Watch dots3-note Preview vs Gemini 3 Pro
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 7,000+ subscribers.
Last updated November 13, 2026