BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases8

Gemini 3 Pro vs o3

Full profiles: Gemini 3 Pro (Google) and o3 (OpenAI): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 16 sources

As of 29 Oct 2026, Gemini 3 Pro and o3 are neck and neck on quality (60.2 vs 61.0 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±4.7 margin). Choose Gemini 3 Pro for multimodal (66 vs 57), human preference (68 vs 61), and reasoning (66 vs 61); choose o3 for maths (71 vs 54), agents & tools (70 vs 62), and instruction following (65 vs 60).

Key facts (as of 29 Oct 2026)

  • Gemini 3 Pro scores 60.2 on the BenchLeader Index and o3 scores 61.0 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
  • o3 costs $3.50 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
  • Of the 28 benchmarks both models have, Gemini 3 Pro leads 23 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
Gemini 3 Pro benchmarks Google o3 benchmarks OpenAIOpen in the comparison tool

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
Codingo362 vs 58 category score; SWE-bench Verified (bash only) 58.4% vs 74.2%Medium
Agents & tool useo370 vs 62 category score; BFCL Overall 63.0% vs 72.5%High
Mathso371 vs 54 category score; Omni-MATH (HELM) 71.4% vs 55.6%High
ReasoningGemini 3 Pro66 vs 61 category score; Arena Hard Prompts 1502 vs 1442Medium
KnowledgeEither56 vs 56 category score; PRBench Finance 39.2% vs 47.7%Either
Images and other mediaGemini 3 Pro66 vs 57 category score; Arena Vision 1305 vs 1214High
Following instructionso365 vs 60 category score; WildBench (HELM) 86.1% vs 85.9%Medium
Chat quality (human preference)Gemini 3 Pro68 vs 61 on Arena votesMedium
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Gemini 3 Pro and o3 are neck and neck on quality (60.2 vs 61.0, within the ±4.7 margin).
  • Gemini 3 Pro is stronger in human preference, multimodal, reasoning.
  • o3 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, instruction following, knowledge, maths, long context.

At a glance

SpecGemini 3 Proo3
DeveloperGoogleOpenAI
Released18 Nov 202516 Apr 2025
Context window (tokens)–200,000
Compared atGemini 3 Proo3
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M–$2.00 / $8.00 / $0.500

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryGemini 3 Proo3Leader
Reasoning65.660.9Gemini 3 Pro
Coding57.861.8o3
Agents & tools61.670.3o3
Maths54.270.6o3
Knowledge55.956.1level
Instruction following59.965.1o3
Human preference67.861.2Gemini 3 Pro
Multimodal65.656.7Gemini 3 Pro
Long context–62.1not comparable

Where sources disagree

Across the 28 benchmarks both have, Gemini 3 Pro leads 23, o3 leads 5. Every overall index that rates both puts Gemini 3 Pro ahead.

Overall indexGemini 3 Proo3Leader
BenchLeader Index60.261.0neck and neck
Arena Text14861432Gemini 3 Pro

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.

MeasureGemini 3 Proo3
Blended price per 1M tokens–$3.50
Input / output per 1M– / –$2.00 / $8.00
Cached input per 1M–$0.500
Price per task: chat reply–$0.0032
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report–$0.029
Price per task: code edit–$0.024
Price per task: agentic coding session–$0.152
Price per task: structured extraction–$0.0056
Output speed–158 tok/s
Time to first answer–5.9 s
Time to a complete answer–9.1 s

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Gemini 3 Pro scores 60.2; Gemini 3 Pro (high) scores 60.1. o3 scores 61.0 and takes 6 s to its first answer token; o3 (high) scores 53.8 in 6 s, o3 (medium) scores 53.3 in 6 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

114 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherGemini 3 Proo3
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader60.261.0
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader61.670.3
Coding scoreBenchLeader57.861.8
Human preference scoreBenchLeader67.861.2
Instruction following scoreBenchLeader59.965.1
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader55.956.1
Maths scoreBenchLeader54.270.6
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader65.656.7
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader65.660.9
Long context scoreBenchLeader–62.1
Blended price $/MBenchLeader–$3.50
Output speedBenchLeader–158 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader–5.9 s
Context windowBenchLeader–200,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub92.6%81.8%†
Humanity's Last ExamScale AI / CAIS37.5%20.3%†
SimpleBenchSimpleBench76.4%53.1%†
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)15021442
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis90.8%†82.7%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis39.7%†20.1%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI91.7%†84.1%†
Kagi LLM BenchmarkKagi LLM Benchmark80.1%67.6%
GPQA Diamond (HELM)HELM Capabilities80.3%75.3%
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize75.0%60.8%†
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize54.0%6.5%†
CritPtArtificial Analysis9.1%†1.1%
SciPredictScale AI SEAL25.3%17.9%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–36.0%†
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–29.0%†
CL-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub15.8%17.8%†
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–39.7%†
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–84.8%†
ForecastBenchForecastBench65.2%64.6%
Coding
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub72.9%62.3%†
WeirdMLWeirdML69.9%52.4%†
GSO-BenchGSO-Bench18.6%8.8%†
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15171460
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)1440–
LiveCodeBenchVals AI86.4%83.9%†
Show all 114 benchmarks
MetricPublisherGemini 3 Proo3
Coding
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI76.4%†–
SWE-Bench ProScale AI SEAL43.3%–
Aider PolyglotAider polyglot leaderboard–81.3%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)SWE-bench74.2%58.4%
SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold)SWE-bench77.4%58.4%
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI14.3%†–
SWE-Bench Pro (private)Scale AI SEAL43.3%–
CadEvalEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–74.0%†
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub1176.8933.5†
AlgoTuneAlgoTune1.8–
LiveCodeBench (AA)Artificial Analysis91.8%†80.8%
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench69.4%–
GDPvalOpenAI40.3%30.8%†
Remote Labor IndexScale AI / CAIS1.3%–
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis41.7%†37.1%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis87.1%†80.7%
MCP AtlasScale AI SEAL70.3%–
BFCL OverallBerkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.5%63.0%
τ²-benchτ²-bench82.5%†–
τ³-bench Bankingτ²-bench18.0%†–
Poker AgentVals AI1078.9%–
Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)Vals AI55.1%†–
BALROGBALROG58.1%–
DeepResearch BenchDeepResearch Bench46.3%†45.2%†
METR Time HorizonsMETR71.0%63.6%
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs5478.2–
BrowseComp-PlusBrowseComp-Plus–50.5%
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–33.3%†
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub91.4%83.9%†
MATH Level 5Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–97.8%†
ProofBenchVals AI20.0%–
AIME (Vals)Vals AI96.7%†85.3%†
MGSMVals AI93.9%†91.8%†
AIME 2026MathArena91.7%–
HMMT February 2026MathArena86.4%–
IMO 2025MathArena–16.7%†
MathArena ApexMathArena23.4%–
Omni-MATH (HELM)HELM Capabilities55.6%71.4%
MATH 500Vals AI96.4%†94.6%†
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)14771448
AIME 2025 (AA)Artificial Analysis–88.3%
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–49.4%†
MMLU-ProVals AI90.1%85.6%†
LegalBenchVals AI87.0%†83.8%†
CorpFinVals AI63.7%†59.7%†
TaxEvalVals AI72.6%†74.6%†
MedQAVals AI96.0%†96.1%†
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL39.2%47.7%
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL40.6%48.6%
MultiNRCScale AI SEAL59.0%45.5%†
MMLU-Pro (HELM)HELM Capabilities90.3%85.9%
CaseLaw v2Vals AI53.1%†–
MedCodeVals AI52.2%†47.3%†
MedScribeVals AI72.0%†76.7%†
Global-MMLU-Lite (AA)Artificial Analysis92.2%†–
Instruction following
IFBenchArtificial Analysis70.4%†71.4%
MultiChallengeScale AI SEAL65.7%56.6%†
TutorBenchScale AI SEAL53.7%52.1%†
IFEval (HELM)HELM Capabilities87.6%86.9%
WildBench (HELM)HELM Capabilities85.9%86.1%
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)14731403
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)14861432
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14851383
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)14961420
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)14911411
Lech Mazur Creative WritingLech Mazur–83.9%†
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)13051214
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis80.2%†70.1%
VISTAScale AI SEAL51.5%50.1%†
MMMU (validation)MMMU–82.9%
MMMU-Pro (official)MMMU81.0%76.4%
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI87.5%†80.4%†
MortgageTaxVals AI69.1%†65.7%†
AudioMCScale AI SEAL54.6%†–
AudioMC (text output)Scale AI SEAL54.6%†–
VTBScale AI SEAL26.9%13.7%
GeoBenchGeoBench84.0%60.0%†
VPCTEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub91.0%52.0%†
Long context
Fiction.LiveBench 120kFiction.live–100.0%†
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis76.0%†74.7%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1451–
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub153.1146.7
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis28.0†20.2
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis290.7†258.3
HELM Capabilities meanHELM Capabilities79.9%81.1%
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL41.7%16.0%
MASKScale AI SEAL42.6%84.5%†
PropensityBenchScale AI SEAL52.9%10.5%
Metadata
AA Openness IndexArtificial Analysis5.6†–

Data as of 2026-10-29. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • o3: 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Gemini 3 Pro: 1 score revision.
  • Gemini 3 Pro: 1 score revision.
  • o3: 1 score revision.
  • Gemini 3 Pro: BenchLeader Index 60.9 → 60.4.
  • Gemini 3 Pro: 1 new result (PRBench Legal).
  • o3: 1 new result (PRBench Legal).
  • Gemini 3 Pro: BenchLeader Index 60.4 → 60.9.
  • Gemini 3 Pro: 1 new result (VTB).
  • o3: 1 new result (VTB).

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Gemini 3 Pro vs o3: questions

Is Gemini 3 Pro better than o3?
Gemini 3 Pro and o3 are neck and neck on quality (60.2 vs 61.0, within the ±4.7 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 29 Oct 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
Is Gemini 3 Pro or o3 better for coding?
o3 scores higher in coding (62 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average). On SWE-bench Verified (bash only), the top shared coding benchmark, it is 74.2% for Gemini 3 Pro against 58.4% for o3.
Is Gemini 3 Pro or o3 better for agents and tool use?
o3 scores higher in agentic tasks (70 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average). On BFCL Overall, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 72.5% for Gemini 3 Pro against 63.0% for o3.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Gemini 3 Pro vs o3?
Across the 28 benchmarks both have, Gemini 3 Pro leads 23, o3 leads 5. Every overall index that rates both puts Gemini 3 Pro ahead.
When was Gemini 3 Pro released?
Gemini 3 Pro was released on 18 Nov 2025.