Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Wins 2 of 5 areas
Reasoning · Long documents
Wins 1 of 5 areas
Agents
Gemini 3.1 Pro wins more areas, narrowly.Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is cheaper and better at agents.
Scores updated · 16 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking21Gemini 3.1 Pro2 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own03Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B3 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software11Even1 each
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs 43% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Gemini 3.1 Pro pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+23.6points ahead
- Common-sense trick questionsSimpleBench+17.1points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+4.6points ahead
Where Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B pulls ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+40.9points ahead
- Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+27.7points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+11.7points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 16 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingEven
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 8.273.882+8.2
- SciCodeGemini 3.1 Pro by 4.658.754.1+4.6
AgentsQwen3.8 2.4T A95B
- GDPValQwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 40.914.755.6+40.9
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingQwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 27.721.449.1+27.7
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 7.1411.1+7.1
ReasoningGemini 3.1 Pro
- SimpleBenchGemini 3.1 Pro by 17.179.662.5+17.1
- Humanity's Last ExamGemini 3.1 Pro by 4.64742.4+4.6
- CritPtQwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 2.317.720+2.3
- GPQA Diamondtie94.193.5tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 3.1 Pro by 23.654.931.3+23.6
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 11.749.160.8+11.7
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 40.110.350.4+40.1
- AA-OmniscienceGemini 3.1 Pro by 27.631.94.3+27.6
- AA IntelligenceQwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 10.229.739.9+10.2
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3.8 2.4T A95B by 3.168.871.9+3.1
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
Gemini 3.1 Pro wins two of the five areas where both have results: reasoning and long documents. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B wins agents, and costs 43% less. They are level on coding and facts.
Which is better for coding?
Neither. They win 1 coding test each of the 2 both models report.
Which is cheaper?
Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $12.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 and $6.00. That makes Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B about 43% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 16 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 12 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.