Model comparison
DeepSeek-R1 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-R1 costs 4.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-R1 scores higher in 1 category and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 18.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 21.2% for DeepSeek-R1 and 98% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
- DeepSeek-R1 is cheaper at $0.50 / $2.15 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 164K.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | |
| Noometry Index | 42.3 | 56.7 |
| Released | 2025-01-20 | 2026-02-19 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 164K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 64K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.15 | $12 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 71 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 46.3 (#68), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 35.7% | 58.9% |
| WeirdML | 41.6% | 72.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | 1484 |
| ALE-Bench | 804.12 | 1,161 |
| AlgoTune | 1.7 | 2.02 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 75.6% |
| DeepSWE | — | 11.7% |
| Aider Polyglot | 71.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1447 |
| GSO | — | 22.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | 66.7% | — |
| MirrorCode | — | 8.9% |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 30.7 (#75), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| DeepResearch Bench | 35.1% | 47.8% |
| BALROG | 34.9% | 57% |
| METR Time Horizons | 53.8% | 77% |
| Terminal-Bench | — | 80.2% |
| APEX-Agents | — | 35.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 26% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 22% |
| ExploitBench | — | 26.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0.8% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 17% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1211 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,774 |
Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 18.6 (#278), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | 77.1% |
| SimpleBench | 40.8% | 79.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 21.2% | 98% |
| CritPt | 1.1% | 17.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1416 | 1485 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.29 | 154.77 |
| ForecastBench | 60 | 59 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 69.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 97.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 55% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 36.8% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 79.4% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 14.3% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 83.2% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 34% |
| DTBench | — | 97.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.8% | — |
| LMCA | — | 53.8% |
| LiveBench | 71.6% | — |
Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 43.8 (#79), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 66.4% | 95.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1400 | 1485 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 59.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 26.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 86.5% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
| Omni-MATH | 42.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 96.6% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 36.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 16.7% |
Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 44.5 (#87), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | 94.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.3% | 10.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1394 | 1485 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 46.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 73.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | 79.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 66.6% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1296 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 26.5% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 26.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 52.4 (#85), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1412 | 1477 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1442 | 1529 |
| LMArena French | 1417 | 1487 |
| LMArena German | 1404 | 1491 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1391 | 1493 |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | 1455 |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | 1498 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | 1479 |
Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 72.0 (#143), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1382 | 1466 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.5% | — |
| IFEval | 78.4% | — |
Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 45.4 (#36), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1391 | 1483 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 75% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 20.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 16.9% |
Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 61.4 (#88), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1481 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1405 | 1482 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1500 | 1491 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1405 | 1488 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83% | — |
| WildBench | 82.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1142 |
| LiveBench Language | 48.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-R1 better than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-R1 costs 4.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1 or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
DeepSeek-R1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $2.15 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.
Is DeepSeek-R1 or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better for coding?
DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.3 versus 42.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 164K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-R1 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview share?
34 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-R1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71.