Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Gemini 3.1 Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 20 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

50.83/100
Margin
4.5pts
winning →
55.3/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite #111 (Supported); Gemini 3.1 Pro #83 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.1 Pro share 20 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite; 27 to Gemini 3.1 Pro.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
20
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite only
0
Gemini 3.1 Pro only
27
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Gemini 3.1 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 20 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

Gemini 3.1 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 55.3 to 50.83. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Gemini 3.1 Pro's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 82.6 against 73.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is CharXiv, 73.2% to 80.2%.

Gemini 3.1 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.25 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite. That is roughly 8.0x on output cost alone.

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 Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.1 Pro
CategoryGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteΔGemini 3.1 Pro
MultimodalGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite73.2Margin→ 9.4Gemini 3.1 Pro82.6
ReasoningGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.1 Pro77.1
MathGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.1 Pro31.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Gemini 3.1 Flash-LiteB · Gemini 3.1 Pro

  1. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 73.2%B 80.2%
    Winner: Gemini 3.1 ProΔ 7
    CharXiv: Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite scored 73.2%; Gemini 3.1 Pro scored 80.2%. Gemini 3.1 Pro wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite$0.25 input / $1.5 outputGemini 3.1 Pro$2 input / $12 outputGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite205 tok/sGemini 3.1 Pro109 tok/sGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite7.50 sGemini 3.1 Pro29.71 sGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite1MGemini 3.1 Pro1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
AA Agentic IndexSource 6.2%21.4%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 12.2%32.0%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 31.3%95.6%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
GDPval-AASource 7.1%23.2%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
GDPval-AASource 642965Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
Gert LabsSource 38.46%56.87%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
Claw-EvalSource —57.8%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —69.7%Not 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
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 0.00%32.03%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA Coding IndexSource 34.7%68.8%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-SciCodeSource 41.9%58.9%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
LiveCodeBench ProSource —82.9%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource —78.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
AA-LCRSource 65.3%72.7%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
CritPtSource 1.1%17.7%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
ARC-AGI-2Source —77.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.0%46.5%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 82.2%94.1%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-HLESource 16.2%44.7%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -15.5%32.9%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 36.4%55.3%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 81.6%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
Math
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source —36.900%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source —16.700%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource —93.2%Not comparable
MultimodalGemini 3.1 Pro wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
CharXivSource 73.2%80.2%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.5%82.4%Gemini 3.1 Pro leads
MMMU-ProSource —83.9%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
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1284Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteGemini 3.1 ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 77.2%77.1%Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Gemini 3.1 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.3 to 50.83. The biggest single separator in this matchup is CharXiv, where the scores are 73.2% and 80.2%.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Gemini 3.1 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.6 versus 73.2. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Google 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.