Gemini 3 Pro vs Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking
Wins 6 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 7 areas
—
Gemini 3 Pro is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking is cheaper.
Scores updated · 23 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven 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 Pro4 of 4 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Gemini 3 Pro3 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own20Gemini 3 Pro2 of 2 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math20Gemini 3 Pro2 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Gemini 3 Pro1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Gemini 3 Pro1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
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.
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking costs 81% 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 Pro pulls ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+56.9points ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues in Python projectsSWE-bench Verified+54.2points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+39.5points ahead
Where Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+5points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 23 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGemini 3 Pro
- SWE-bench VerifiedGemini 3 Pro by 54.276.222+54.2
- Terminal-Bench HardGemini 3 Pro by 36.441.75.3+36.4
- SciCodeGemini 3 Pro by 23.156.133+23.1
- LiveCodeBench v6Gemini 3 Pro by 21.487.466+21.4
AgentsGemini 3 Pro
- BrowseCompGemini 3 Pro by 56.959.22.3+56.9
- GDPValGemini 3 Pro by 34.234.20+34.2
ReasoningGemini 3 Pro
- Humanity's Last ExamGemini 3 Pro by 29.439.710.3+29.4
- GPQA DiamondGemini 3 Pro by 20.190.870.7+20.1
- CritPtGemini 3 Pro by 8.89.10.3+8.8
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 3 Pro by 39.555.816.3+39.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking by 58.513.5+5
MathGemini 3 Pro
- HMMT Feb. 2026Gemini 3 Pro by 7.686.478.8+7.6
- AIME 2026Gemini 3 Pro by 3.491.788.3+3.4
Following instructionsGemini 3 Pro
- IFBenchGemini 3 Pro by 19.770.450.7+19.7
Other results8 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 Pro by 71.415.3-56.1+71.4
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Gemini 3 Pro by 5987.128.1+59
- τ²-BenchGemini 3 Pro by 499849+49
- τ²-Bench (Retail)Gemini 3 Pro by 29.285.356.1+29.2
- AIME25 no toolsGemini 3 Pro by 24.39671.7+24.3
- AA IntelligenceGemini 3 Pro by 18.2289.8+18.2
- AIME 2025Gemini 3 Pro by 1510085+15
- MMLU-ProGemini 3 Pro by 8.290.181.9+8.2
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemini 3 Pro or Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking?
Gemini 3 Pro wins six of the seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, math, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking wins none, but costs 81% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Gemini 3 Pro. It wins 4 of the 4 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Gemini 3 Pro costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $12.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking costs $0.20 and $2.40. That makes Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Thinking about 81% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 23 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 8 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.