Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Gemini 3 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported); Gemini 3 Pro #19 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemini 3 Pro share 16 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to Gemini 2.5 Pro; 11 to Gemini 3 Pro.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 8
- Gemini 3 Pro only
- 11
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Gemini 3 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Pro only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 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
Gemini 3 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 67.73 to 57.25. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3 Pro's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 32.9 against 11.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 14.138% to 37.600%.
Gemini 3 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Pro. Gemini 3 Pro gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
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 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Δ | Gemini 3 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6 | Margin→ 21.3 | Gemini 3 Pro32.9 |
| Coding | Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 ProNot measured |
| Reasoning | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 Pro31.1 |
| Knowledge | Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 ProNot measured |
| Multimodal | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 Pro81.1 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 14.138%B 37.600%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 23.5FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 14.138%; Gemini 3 Pro scored 37.600%. Gemini 3 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 4.167%B 18.750%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 14.6FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 4.167%; Gemini 3 Pro scored 18.750%. Gemini 3 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Gemini 3 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 output | Gemini 3 Pro$2 input / $12 output | Gemini 2.5 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/s | Gemini 3 Pro109 tok/s | Gemini 2.5 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 2.5 Pro21.19 s | Gemini 3 Pro32.65 s | Gemini 2.5 Pro reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro1M | Gemini 3 Pro2M | Gemini 3 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic6 benchmarks
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Gemini 3 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 18.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.8% | 39.5% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 84.4% | 90.8% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 21.1% | 37.2% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -14.3% | 15.8% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 39.0% | 55.9% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 87.4% | 90.9% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | — | 89.8% | Not comparable |
MathGemini 3 Pro wins2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Gemini 3 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | — | 92.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Gemini 3 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 74.9% | 80.2% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1197 | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 81% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 86.6% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 87.6% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 72.7% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 81.4% | Not comparable |
| V*Source | — | 88.0% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Gemini 3 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 48.7% | 70.4% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemini 3 Pro?
Gemini 3 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.73 to 57.25. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 14.138% and 37.600%.
Which is better for math, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemini 3 Pro?
Gemini 3 Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 32.9 versus 11.6. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.