Model Comparison
V3.1 (Reasoning)
vs. Gemma 3 12B Instruct
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · DeepSeek, Google
Recommended Pick
De V3.1 (Reasoning) 14 metric wins Strongest on: Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding
Best Value
Gemma 3 12B Instruct
100.0 value score
27.5 reasoning / $0.14/1M
Lowest Price
Gemma 3 12B Instruct
$0.09/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V3.1 (Reasoning)
59.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
V3.1 (Reasoning)
29.7 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
Gemma 3 12B Instruct has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Gemma 3 12B Instruct is 6.6x cheaper on input tokens than V3.1 (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
V3.1 (Reasoning) leads Gemma 3 12B Instruct by 32.1 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
V3.1 (Reasoning) leads Gemma 3 12B Instruct by 23.4 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
V3.1 (Reasoning) wins 14 measurable categories, including Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding, Math.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V3.1 (Reasoning)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Gemma 3 12B Instruct
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick De V3.1 (Reasoning) | Go Gemma 3 12B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.59/1M | $0.09/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.69/1M | $0.29/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.86/1M | $0.14/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | |
| Release Date | Aug 21, 2025 | Mar 12, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | — |
| TTFT | — | — |
| Latency | — | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 35.1 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 59.6 | 27.5 |
| Intelligence | 27.7 | 8.8 |
| Coding | 29.7 | 6.3 |
| Math | 89.7 | 18.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 77.9% | 34.9% |
| MMLU Pro | 85.1% | 59.5% |
| HLE | 13.0% | 4.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 78.4% | 13.7% |
| MATH 500 | — | 85.3% |
| AIME 2025 | 89.7% | 18.3% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 22.0% |
| SciCode | 39.1% | 17.4% |
| LCR | 53.3% | 6.7% |
| IFBench | 41.5% | 36.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 37.4% | 10.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 25.0% | 0.8% |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 3 12B Instruct offers the best value at $0.09/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V3.1 (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 59.6 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
V3.1 (Reasoning) reaches a 29.7 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
V3.1 (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Gemma 3 12B Instruct
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
