Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Gemini 3.1 Pro 
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next Verdict
- Gemini 3.1 Pro leads on quality: 63.9 vs 61.6.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro is stronger in composite, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is stronger in agents & tools, coding.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 20× cheaper ($0.230 vs $4.50 per 1M blended).
- Gemini 3.1 Pro streams 2.2× faster (121 vs 55 tokens per second).
| Metric | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.9 | 61.6 |
| Agents & tools score | 60.4 | 65.8 |
| Coding score | 59.8 | 71.2 |
| Composite score | 67.5 | 67.4 |
| Human preference score | 59.8 | – |
| Instruction following score | 69.7 | – |
| Knowledge score | 65.9 | 59.6 |
| Long context score | 67.5 | 66.3 |
| Maths score | 61.9 | – |
| Multimodal score | 66.0 | 64.3 |
| Reasoning score | 70.8 | 63.4 |
| Blended price $/M | $4.50 | $0.230 |
| Output speed | 121 tok/s | 55 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 34.8 s | 39.0 s |
| Context window | 1.0M | 256k |
| GPQA Diamond | 94.1% | – |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 59.6% | – |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 95.6% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.4% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | – |
| SimpleBench | 79.6% | – |
| SciCode | 58.9% | – |
| WeirdML | 72.1% | – |
| APEX-Agents | 33.5% | – |
| ProofBench | 26.0% | – |
| GSO-Bench | 22.6% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1487 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1508 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1520 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1447 | 1635 |
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | – |
| LMArena Agent | -5.8 | -0.1 |
| LiveBench | – | 76.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 87.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 72.5% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 61.6% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 85.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 74.2% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 74.6% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 77.1% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 30.4 | 39.9 |
| IFBench | 77.1% | – |
| AA-LCR | 82.0% | 79.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 82.4% | 79.8% |
| AA-Omniscience | 31.9 | -9.7 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 53.8% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 94.1% | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 47.0% | 38.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | 58.7% | 50.6% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 95.6% | – |
| AIME 2026 | 98.3% | – |
| HMMT February 2026 | 94.7% | – |
| MathArena Apex | 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 | 17.7% | 11.1% |
| GDPval (AA) | 20.2% | 57.4% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | 21.4% | 45.4% |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | 30.3% | – |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | 41.3% | – |
| APEX-Agents (AA) | 32.0% | – |
| CyberBench | 36.4% | – |
| 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 | 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% | – |
| 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.
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: questions
- Is Gemini 3.1 Pro better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro leads on quality: 63.9 vs 61.6. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Gemini 3.1 Pro is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Gemini 3.1 Pro better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for coding?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores higher in coding (71 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Gemini 3.1 Pro better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores higher in agentic tasks (66 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is cheaper: $0.230 against $4.50 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro streams faster: 121 against 55 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro accepts more context: 1.0M against 256k tokens.