Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Grok 4
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 3.1 Pro #83 (Estimated); Grok 4 #50 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.1 Pro and Grok 4 share 16 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 31 results are unique to Gemini 3.1 Pro; 0 to Grok 4.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- Gemini 3.1 Pro only
- 31
- Grok 4 only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Grok 4 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 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
Grok 4 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 60.42 to 55.3. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3.1 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Grok 4.
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 3.1 Pro | Δ | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemini 3.1 Pro31.8 | Margin← 16.5 | Grok 415.3 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.1 Pro77.1 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4Not measured |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.1 Pro82.6 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 36.900%B 19.655%Winner: Gemini 3.1 ProΔ 17.2FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 3.1 Pro scored 36.900%; Grok 4 scored 19.655%. Gemini 3.1 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 16.700%B 2.083%Winner: Gemini 3.1 ProΔ 14.6FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Gemini 3.1 Pro scored 16.700%; Grok 4 scored 2.083%. Gemini 3.1 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Grok 4 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.1 Pro$2 input / $12 output | Grok 4Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.1 Pro109 tok/s | Grok 454 tok/s | Gemini 3.1 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.1 Pro29.71 s | Grok 415.60 s | Grok 4 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.1 Pro1M | Grok 4128K | Gemini 3.1 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Grok 4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 57.8% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | 69.7% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.6% | 74.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 21.4% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 32.0% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 23.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 965 | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 56.87% | 42.34% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| 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 |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Grok 4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 46.5% | 33.3% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 94.1% | 87.7% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 44.7% | 23.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 32.9% | 3.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 55.3% | 41.4% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 49.9% | 64.2% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
MathGemini 3.1 Pro wins2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Grok 4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | 93.2% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Grok 4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 68.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1284 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Grok 4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 77.1% | 53.7% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Grok 4?
Grok 4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.42 to 55.3. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 36.900% and 19.655%.
Which is better for math, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Grok 4?
Gemini 3.1 Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 31.8 versus 15.3. 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.