DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
DeepSeek V4 Pro 
Gemini 3.1 Pro Verdict
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) and Gemini 3.1 Pro are level on quality (64.2 vs 63.9).
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) is stronger in agents & tools, composite, instruction following, reasoning.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro is stronger in coding, knowledge, long context, maths, human preference, multimodal.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) is 8.3× cheaper ($0.544 vs $4.50 per 1M blended).
- Gemini 3.1 Pro streams 1.5× faster (121 vs 81 tokens per second).
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) | Gemini 3.1 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 64.2 | 63.9 |
| Agents & tools score | 70.2 | 60.4 |
| Coding score | 58.8 | 59.8 |
| Composite score | 75.0 | 67.5 |
| Instruction following score | 74.3 | 69.7 |
| Knowledge score | 58.1 | 65.9 |
| Long context score | 66.6 | 67.5 |
| Maths score | 53.7 | 61.9 |
| Reasoning score | 70.9 | 70.8 |
| Human preference score | – | 59.8 |
| Multimodal score | – | 66.0 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.544 | $4.50 |
| Output speed | 81 tok/s | 121 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 55.6 s | 34.8 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1.0M |
| GPQA Diamond | 89.7% | 94.1% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 45.3% | 59.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | 26.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 96.7% | 95.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 77.6% | – |
| SimpleQA Verified | 47.0% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam | – | 46.4% |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 80.2% |
| SimpleBench | – | 79.6% |
| SciCode | 50.0% | 58.9% |
| WeirdML | 48.9% | 72.1% |
| APEX-Agents | – | 33.5% |
| ProofBench | 16.0% | 26.0% |
| GSO-Bench | – | 22.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 155 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1487 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1508 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1520 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1447 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1296 |
| LMArena Agent | – | -5.8 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 36.3 | 30.4 |
| IFBench | 76.5% | 77.1% |
| AA-LCR | 80.3% | 82.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 82.4% |
| AA-Omniscience | 0.8 | 31.9 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 46.2% | 53.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.8% | 94.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 41.0% | 47.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.0% | 58.7% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 96.2% | 95.6% |
| LiveCodeBench | 87.5% | – |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.3% | – |
| LegalBench | 80.3% | – |
| CorpFin | 61.4% | – |
| TaxEval | 72.1% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 77.4% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 89.4% | – |
| Vals Index | 42.9 | – |
| AIME 2026 | 96.7% | 98.3% |
| HMMT February 2026 | 93.9% | 94.7% |
| MathArena Apex | 28.1% | 60.9% |
| MultiChallenge | – | 71.4% |
| PRBench Finance | – | 41.9% |
| PRBench Legal | – | 44.0% |
| MultiNRC | – | 64.7% |
| HiL-Bench | – | 35.3% |
| TutorBench | – | 53.0% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | – | 1142 |
| ARC-AGI-1 | – | 98.0% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | – | 77.1% |
| ARC-AGI-3 | – | 0.4% |
| CritPt | 18.0% | 17.7% |
| GDPval (AA) | 49.7% | 20.2% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | 39.6% | 21.4% |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | 38.3% | 30.3% |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | 18.8% | 41.3% |
| APEX-Agents (AA) | 24.3% | 32.0% |
| CaseLaw v2 | 59.4% | – |
| Code Migration | 26.2% | – |
| CyberBench | – | 36.4% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | 51.6% | – |
| Finance Agent v2 | 44.1% | – |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark | 3.8% | – |
| Legal Research Bench | 23.1% | – |
| MedCode | 40.5% | – |
| MedScribe | 75.1% | – |
| ProgramBench | 0.0% | – |
| Public Benefits Bench | 62.9% | – |
| SkillsBench | 51.3% | – |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | 49.9% | – |
| FORTRESS | – | 29.8% |
| MASK | – | 42.4% |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | – | 13.5% |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoring | – | 33.8% |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | – | 29.8% |
| VTB | – | 29.0% |
| LMArena Maths | – | 1489 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | – | 1480 |
| LMArena Instruction Following | – | 1481 |
| LMArena Multi-turn | – | 1495 |
| LMArena Longer Queries | – | 1500 |
| LMArena Document | – | 1459 |
| Chess Puzzles | 20.0% | 55.0% |
| EBR-bench | – | 14.3% |
| BALROG | – | 57.0% |
| PostTrainBench | – | 22.0% |
| ExploitBench | – | 26.1% |
| CL-bench | – | 20.8% |
| CL-bench Life | – | 16.9% |
| METR Time Horizons | – | 77.0% |
| DeepSWE | – | 11.7% |
| LMCA | 41.2% | – |
| DTBench | 90.7% | – |
| ForecastBench | – | 59.0% |
| GBAEval | – | 0.8% |
| ALE-Bench | – | 1160.6 |
| AlgoTune | – | 2.0 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | – | 911.2 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | – | 26.5% |
| GDP.pdf | – | 17.0% |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemini 3.1 Pro: questions
- Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemini 3.1 Pro?
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) and Gemini 3.1 Pro are level on quality (64.2 vs 63.9). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemini 3.1 Pro for coding?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro scores higher in coding (60 vs 59 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemini 3.1 Pro for agentic tasks?
- DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in agentic tasks (70 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemini 3.1 Pro?
- DeepSeek V4 Pro is cheaper: $0.544 against $4.50 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemini 3.1 Pro?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro streams faster: 121 against 81 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro accepts more context: 1.0M against 1M tokens.