Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Trinity Large Thinking
Wins 6 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Gemini 3.1 Pro is the stronger all-rounder.Trinity Large Thinking is cheaper.
Scores updated · 22 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six 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.
- CodingWriting and fixing software40Gemini 3.1 Pro4 of 4 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own30Gemini 3.1 Pro3 of 3 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Gemini 3.1 Pro3 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21Gemini 3.1 Pro2 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 1 test
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
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.
Trinity Large Thinking costs 93% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Gemini 3.1 Pro pulls ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+53.2points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+44points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+35points ahead
Where Trinity Large Thinking pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 22 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGemini 3.1 Pro
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Gemini 3.1 Pro by 53.273.820.6+53.2
- Terminal-Bench HardGemini 3.1 Pro by 31.153.822.7+31.1
- LMArena · WebDevGemini 3.1 Pro by 208 rating points14471239+208 rating
- SciCodeGemini 3.1 Pro by 18.158.740.6+18.1
AgentsGemini 3.1 Pro
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingGemini 3.1 Pro by 15.621.45.8+15.6
- GDPValGemini 3.1 Pro by 14.714.70+14.7
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Gemini 3.1 Pro by 3.540.5+3.5
ReasoningGemini 3.1 Pro
- Humanity's Last ExamGemini 3.1 Pro by 31.24715.8+31.2
- GPQA DiamondGemini 3.1 Pro by 18.994.175.2+18.9
- CritPtGemini 3.1 Pro by 16.817.70.9+16.8
FactsGemini 3.1 Pro
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGemini 3.1 Pro by 3549.114.1+35
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 3.1 Pro by 32.454.922.5+32.4
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterTrinity Large Thinking by 3.510.46.9+3.5
Following instructionsGemini 3.1 Pro
- IFBenchGemini 3.1 Pro by 20.877.156.3+20.8
Other results7 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-OmniscienceGemini 3.1 Pro by 7631.9-44.1+76
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGemini 3.1 Pro by 4368.825.8+43
- AA IntelligenceGemini 3.1 Pro by 18.929.710.8+18.9
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 5.595.690.1+5.5
- vectara_factual_consistencyTrinity Large Thinking by 3.589.693.1+3.5
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthtie107.7117.3tie
- vectara_answer_ratetie99.499tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Trinity Large Thinking?
Gemini 3.1 Pro wins all six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. Trinity Large Thinking wins none, but costs 93% less.
Which is better for coding?
Gemini 3.1 Pro. It wins 4 of the 4 coding tests both models report; Trinity Large Thinking wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $12.00 per million output tokens; Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 and $0.80. That makes Trinity Large Thinking about 93% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 22 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 15 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 7 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.