Head-to-head comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Compare published benchmark results from matching versions and cohorts, API pricing, and technical specifications. Any documented test setup differences remain visible.

shared result series: 12
distinct benchmarks: 10
latest retrieval: 2026-09-29

First modelSecond model

Specifications

General specifications

Release date, availability, context window, architecture, and published parameter counts at a glance. Undisclosed details remain marked as unavailable.

Specifications for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Attribute	Claude Opus 4.6	Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Provider	Anthropic	Google
Released	Feb 2026	Feb 19, 2026
Availability	Active	Preview
Model type	Proprietary	Proprietary
Parameters	Not published	Not published
Architecture	Not published	Not published
Context window	1,000,000 tokens	1,048,576 tokens
Knowledge cutoff	May 2025	Not published
Technical sources	Model, Context	Model

Pricing

API pricing compared

The table compares official standard API rates per 1M tokens, including published cache pricing. Batch, fast, priority, regional surcharges, tool calls, and cloud platform pricing are excluded.

API pricing for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Price type	Claude Opus 4.6	Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
API input	$5	$2 ≤200K / $4 >200K
API output	$25	$12 ≤200K / $18 >200K
Cache read	$0.5	$0.2 ≤200K / $0.4 >200K
Cache write (5 min.)	$6.25	Not listed
Cache write (1 hr.)	$10	Not listed
Price verified	09/22/2026 Source	09/22/2026 Source

Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

API inputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

Claude Opus 4.6$5

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview$2

API outputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

Claude Opus 4.6$25

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview$12

Cache readUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

Claude Opus 4.6$0.5

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview$0.2

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Pricing by provider

Direct developer pricing and provider endpoint tariffs routed through OpenRouter are listed separately. Prices are in USD per 1M tokens. Context-dependent direct tiers plus regional, Flex, Priority, and other OpenRouter tariffs remain individually identifiable.

Provider pricing for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Model	Provider	Purchase route and tariff	Input per 1M tokens	Output per 1M tokens	Source
Claude Opus 4.6	Anthropic	Direct from developerStandard API	Lowest listed price: $5	Lowest listed price: $25	Source09/22/2026
	Amazon Bedrock	Via OpenRouteramazon-bedrock	Lowest listed price: $5	Lowest listed price: $25	Source10/15/2026
	Anthropic	Via OpenRouteranthropic	Lowest listed price: $5	Lowest listed price: $25	Source10/15/2026
	Azure	Via OpenRouterazure/global	Lowest listed price: $5	Lowest listed price: $25	Source10/15/2026
	Claude Platform on AWS	Via OpenRouterclaude-on-aws	Lowest listed price: $5	Lowest listed price: $25	Source10/15/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/europe	$5.5	$27.5	Source10/15/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global	Lowest listed price: $5	Lowest listed price: $25	Source10/15/2026
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview	Google	Direct from developerUp to 200,000 context tokens	$2	$12	Source09/22/2026
	Google	Direct from developerAbove 200,000 context tokens	$4	$18	Source09/22/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global	$2	$12	Source10/15/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global/flex	Lowest listed price: $1	Lowest listed price: $6	Source10/15/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global/priority	$3.6	$21.6	Source10/15/2026
	Google AI Studio	Via OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio	$2	$12	Source10/15/2026
	Google AI Studio	Via OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio/flex	Lowest listed price: $1	Lowest listed price: $6	Source10/15/2026
	Google AI Studio	Via OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio/priority	$3.6	$21.6	Source10/15/2026

Performance

Shared benchmarks

Only published results with the same benchmark version, task, metric, and comparison cohort are paired. Different reasoning levels, agents, harnesses, or output limits appear directly in the table.

Capability profile from matched benchmarks

Each axis averages directly matched benchmark families. A value of 100 means the stronger value within this pair, not a universal quality score.

Not enough directly matched categories for a reliable radar

Only 3 of at least 5 categories have comparable, direct model measurements. The benchmark tables below show the available evidence without filling missing axes.

Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Humanity's Last ExamOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Opus 4.634.44% ± 1.86

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview46.44% ± 1.96

MedCodeOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Opus 4.648.244 %

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview59.062 %

MedScribeOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Opus 4.686.738 %

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview76.114 %

MultiChallengeOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.656.02% ± 1.08

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview71.37% ± 1.74

MultiNRCOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.648.34% ± 3.02

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview64.74% ± 2.88

PRBench FinanceOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.653.28% ± 0.18

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview41.87% ± 1.22

PRBench LegalOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.652.27% ± 0.66

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview44.02% ± 1.12

TutorBenchOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.653.55% ± 1.01

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview52.99% ± 1.06

Vibe Code Bench v1.1Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Opus 4.657.573 %

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview32.034 %

VisualToolBenchOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.627.52% ± 1.45

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview28.97% ± 0.91

MultiNRCOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.657.06% ± 2.99

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview64.74% ± 2.88

TutorBenchOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

Claude Opus 4.653.68% ± 1.02

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview52.99% ± 1.06

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Benchmark scores for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Benchmark and task	Claude Opus 4.6	Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview	Source
Humanity's Last ExamOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: final 2,500-question public setMetric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Snapshot: claude-opus-4-6-thinking-max, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Snapshot: gemini-3.1-pro-preview-thinking-high, Attempts: pass@1All 2,500 public questions, temperature 0, and an automatic answer extractor.	34.44% ± 1.86 95% confidence interval: ±1.86	Winner46.44% ± 1.96 95% confidence interval: ±1.96	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 09/02/2026
MedCodeOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	48.244 %	Winner59.062 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/26/2026
MedScribeOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner86.738 %	76.114 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/26/2026
MultiChallengeOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: four multi-turn challenge typesMetric: rubric pass rateScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1Multi-turn conversations with binary task-specific rubrics.	56.02% ± 1.08 95% confidence interval: ±1.08	Higher measured value71.37% ± 1.74 95% confidence interval: ±1.74	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
MultiNRCOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: French, Spanish, and Chinese releaseMetric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1Native, non-translated reasoning tasks with automatic evaluation.	48.34% ± 3.02 95% confidence interval: ±3.02	Higher measured value64.74% ± 2.88 95% confidence interval: ±2.88	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
PRBench FinanceOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: full finance setMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1600 finance tasks with task-specific rubrics and o4-mini as judge.	Higher measured value53.28% ± 0.18 95% confidence interval: ±0.18	41.87% ± 1.22 95% confidence interval: ±1.22	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
PRBench LegalOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: full legal setMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1500 legal tasks with task-specific rubrics and o4-mini as judge.	Higher measured value52.27% ± 0.66 95% confidence interval: ±0.66	44.02% ± 1.12 95% confidence interval: ±1.12	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
TutorBenchOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1,490-task releaseMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@11,490 tasks with weighted rubrics and Claude 4 Sonnet as judge.	Higher measured value53.55% ± 1.01 95% confidence interval: ±1.01	52.99% ± 1.06 95% confidence interval: ±1.06	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterSettings: Harness: OpenHands	Winner57.573 %	32.034 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
VisualToolBenchOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1,204-task releaseMetric: average pass rateScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: thinking, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@11,204 tasks, six tools, and at most 20 tool calls per task.	27.52% ± 1.45 95% confidence interval: ±1.45	Higher measured value28.97% ± 0.91 95% confidence interval: ±0.91	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
MultiNRCOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: French, Spanish, and Chinese releaseMetric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: max, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1Native, non-translated reasoning tasks with automatic evaluation.	57.06% ± 2.99 95% confidence interval: ±2.99	Higher measured value64.74% ± 2.88 95% confidence interval: ±2.88	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
TutorBenchOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1,490-task releaseMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: max, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@11,490 tasks with weighted rubrics and Claude 4 Sonnet as judge.	Higher measured value53.68% ± 1.02 95% confidence interval: ±1.02	52.99% ± 1.06 95% confidence interval: ±1.06	Scale AI Source details Data as of: 08/26/2026
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Our model tests

Our tests

SVG short test

One SVG prompt and fixed output settings. Captures are shown only with 0 reported reasoning tokens or documented lack of reasoning controls. Identical test conditions do not make the models' internal compute identical.

Shared test round: 4ae5d8eeb9a9

Claude Opus 4.6

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Unavailable in this round

Earlier tests

Pelican on a bicycle

A community classic for free-form SVG drawing.

Claude Opus 4.6

Reasoning (requested): high

Current attempt

Run date: Oct 1, 2026
API provider: openrouter
Requested API model: anthropic/claude-opus-4.6
API model reported in response: anthropic/claude-opus-4.6
Reasoning setting: high
Pinned endpoint: Anthropic | anthropic/claude-4.6-opus-20260205
Temperature: Provider default
Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens
Test protocol: community-visual-tests-v1
Technical checks: Passed, not a quality rating
Response time: 85.1 s

Visually reviewed. This individual test does not establish overall model quality.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

The response reached the token limit. No complete recording is available.

Reasoning (requested): high

Current attempt

Run date: Oct 6, 2026
API provider: openrouter
Requested API model: google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview
API model reported in response: google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview
Reasoning setting: high
Pinned endpoint: Google AI Studio | google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview-20260219
Temperature: Provider default
Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens
Test protocol: community-visual-tests-v1
Technical checks: Failed
Response time: 63.8 s

Not yet visually reviewed. A successful recording does not confirm correct physics or full compliance with the prompt.

Earlier attempts (3)

Oct 2, 2026API request failedReasoning setting: high
Oct 1, 2026API request failedReasoning setting: high
Sep 7, 2026API request failedReasoning setting: high

Prompt and test conditions

Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle

Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens

Task origin (Simon Willison)

How to read this comparison

Winning one benchmark is not an overall verdict

Your workload, budget, and required context length matter most. A coding benchmark says little about visual understanding or agent performance.

The standard price table uses direct developer rates. The provider comparison labels OpenRouter endpoints, regions, and special tariffs separately.

Every result links to its measurement source and retrieval date. Labels distinguish vendor reports, official benchmark leaderboards, and independent evaluations. Disputed or archived results are excluded.

More matchups

Compare Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview with other leading models using the same data and benchmark logic.

View the complete LLM comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Change model selection

General specifications

API pricing compared

Shared benchmarks

Capability profile from matched benchmarks

Our tests

SVG short test

Claude Opus 4.6

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Pelican on a bicycle

Winning one benchmark is not an overall verdict

Related LLM comparisons