Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think
80
Winner · 3/8 categoriesGranite-4.0-1B
~40
0/8 categoriesGemini 3 Pro Deep Think· Granite-4.0-1B
Pick Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Granite-4.0-1B only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 80 to 40. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think's sharpest advantage is in multilingual, where it averages 87.4 against 27.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 97% to 29.7%.
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think is the reasoning model in the pair, while Granite-4.0-1B 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 Pro Deep Think gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 128K for Granite-4.0-1B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think | Granite-4.0-1B |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 77% | — |
| BrowseComp | 87% | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | 73% | — |
| Coding | ||
| HumanEval | 91% | 73% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 58% | — |
| LiveCodeBench | 58% | — |
| SWE-bench Pro | 63% | — |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 95% | — |
| OfficeQA Pro | 95% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| MuSR | 93% | — |
| BBH | 95% | 59.7% |
| LongBench v2 | 94% | — |
| MRCRv2 | 96% | — |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 45.1% | — |
| KnowledgeGemini 3 Pro Deep Think wins | ||
| MMLU | 99% | 59.7% |
| GPQA | 97% | 29.7% |
| SuperGPQA | 95% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 81% | 32.9% |
| HLE | 32% | — |
| FrontierScience | 88% | — |
| SimpleQA | 95% | — |
| Instruction FollowingGemini 3 Pro Deep Think wins | ||
| IFEval | 89% | 78.5% |
| MultilingualGemini 3 Pro Deep Think wins | ||
| MGSM | 92% | 27.5% |
| MMLU-ProX | 85% | — |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2023 | 99% | — |
| AIME 2024 | 99% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 98% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 95% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 97% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 96% | — |
| BRUMO 2025 | 96% | — |
| MATH-500 | 92% | — |
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think is ahead overall, 80 to 40. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 97% and 29.7%.
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.4 versus 31.7. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 89 versus 78.5. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemini 3 Pro Deep Think has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.4 versus 27.5. Inside this category, MGSM is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.