Model Comparison
Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning)
vs. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Anthropic, Google
Recommended Pick
Go Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 15 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
100.0 value score
65.3 reasoning / $4.50/1M
Lowest Price
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
$2.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
65.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
55.5 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is 1.9x cheaper on input tokens than Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning).
Speed gap
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview generates about 2.6x as many tokens per second as Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning) by 0.9 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning) by 21.4 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning) | Top Pick Go Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $3.75/1M | $2.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $15.00/1M | $12.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $6.56/1M | $4.50/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | |
| Release Date | May 22, 2025 | Feb 19, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 45.8 tok/s | 117.7 tok/s |
| TTFT | 9412ms | 21280ms |
| Latency | 9412ms | 21280ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 67.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 64.4 | 65.3 |
| Intelligence | 38.7 | 57.2 |
| Coding | 34.1 | 55.5 |
| Math | 74.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 77.7% | 94.1% |
| MMLU Pro | 84.2% | — |
| HLE | 9.6% | 44.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 65.5% | — |
| MATH 500 | 99.1% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 74.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 77.3% | — |
| SciCode | 40.0% | 58.9% |
| LCR | 64.7% | 72.7% |
| IFBench | 54.7% | 77.1% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 64.6% | 95.6% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 31.1% | 53.8% |
Key Takeaways
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview offers the best value at $2.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has the strongest reasoning profile with a 65.3 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview reaches a 55.5 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude 4 Sonnet (Reasoning)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
