Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 18 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.1 Pro #87 (Estimated); Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B #159 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.1 Pro and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 18 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 24 results are unique to Gemini 3.1 Pro; 11 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 18
- Gemini 3.1 Pro only
- 24
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 11
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Gemini 3.1 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 18 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, 54.66 to 43.32. 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 76.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is CharXiv, 80.2% to 76.3%.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B 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. Gemini 3.1 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
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 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.1 Pro82.6 | Margin← 6.3 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Coding | Gemini 3.1 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.1 Pro77.1 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.1 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Math | Gemini 3.1 Pro31.8 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 3.1 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 80.2%B 76.3%Winner: Gemini 3.1 ProΔ 4CharXiv: Gemini 3.1 Pro scored 80.2%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 76.3%. 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 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.1 Pro$2 input / $12 output | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.1 Pro109 tok/s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.1 Pro29.71 s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.1 Pro1M | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Gemini 3.1 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 57.8% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | 69.7% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.6% | 45.3% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 21.4% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 32.0% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 23.2% | 0.0% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 965 | 465 | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 56.87% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 13.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 37.5% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | — | 47.4% | Not comparable |
Coding6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | 82.9% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 78.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 32.03% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 68.8% | 13.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 58.9% | 27.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| SciCodeSource | — | 32% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA-DSource | 94.3% | 72.2% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| 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% | 14.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 94.1% | 46.9% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 44.7% | 5.3% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 32.9% | -56.0% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 55.3% | 14.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 49.9% | 83.1% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | 93.2% | — | Not comparable |
MultimodalGemini 3.1 Pro wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 83.9% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 80.2% | 76.3% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| ERQASource | 69.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | 72.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 84.4% | 57.8% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| ZeroBenchSource | 29.0% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | 81.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 82.4% | 53.2% | Gemini 3.1 Pro leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1276 | — | Not comparable |
| MMMUSource | — | 70.8% | Not comparable |
| MMLongBench-DocSource | — | 57.5% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| AI2D_TESTSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| RefCOCO (avg)Source | — | 90.5% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Gemini 3.1 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 54.66 to 43.32. The biggest single separator in this matchup is CharXiv, where the scores are 80.2% and 76.3%.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Gemini 3.1 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.6 versus 76.3. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.