Benchmark scores
Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.
LLM Comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Composer 2.5: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.
Side-by-side Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Composer 2.5 comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.
Verdict: Gemini 3.1 Pro ranks higher (#124 vs #138) and wins 1 of 1 shared benchmarks; Composer 2.5 costs less ($0.50/$2.50 vs $2.00/$12.0 per 1M tokens).
Rank #124 vs #138AskClash overall scores 40.8 vs 30.0.
Pricing $2.00/$12.0 vs $0.50/$2.50Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.
Proprietary vs ProprietaryGoogle vs Cursor.
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Composer 2.5 benchmark comparison
Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.
| Metric | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Composer 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40.8 | 30.0 |
| Leaderboard Rank | #124 | #138 |
| ACB | — | 53.2 |
| RWT | — | 8.5 |
| Coding Agent Index | — | 62.0 |
| HLE | 51.4 | — |
| GPQA | 94.3 | — |
| SWE-bench | 80.6 | — |
| SWE-Pro | 54.2 | 47.0 |
| SWE-Atlas | — | 72.0 |
| DeepSWE | 11.7 | — |
| GDPval-AA | 1317.0 | — |
| MCP Atlas | 69.2 | — |
| Finance Agent | 43.0 | — |
| CharXiv | 80.2 | — |
| MMMU-Pro | 83.9 | — |
| ARC-AGI 2 | 77.1 | — |
| Tau2 | 99.3 | — |
| MRCR | 84.9 | — |
| Input Price (per 1M tokens) | $2.00 | $0.50 |
| Output Price (per 1M tokens) | $12.0 | $2.50 |
| Context Window | 1M | 200K |
| Benchmarks Published | 10 | 4 |
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Composer 2.5 head-to-head charts
Gemini 3.1 Pro leads 2 and Composer 2.5 leads 0 of 2 shared benchmarks. Composer 2.5 is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.
Gemini 3.1 ProComposer 2.5
Overall
SWE-Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Input$2.00
Output$12.0
Workload$4.40
Context1M
Composer 2.5
Input$0.50
Output$2.50
Workload$1.00
Context200K
Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.
More Gemini 3.1 Pro and Composer 2.5 comparisons
Explore how Gemini 3.1 Pro and Composer 2.5 stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.
Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Gemini 3.1 ProKimi K3.1 Pro vs Composer 2.5Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 ProClaude Opus 5.5 vs Composer 2.5Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.1 ProClaude Fable 5.1 vs Composer 2.5Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 ProClaude Sonnet 5.5 vs Composer 2.5Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.1 ProClaude Opus 5 vs Composer 2.5
How to read this comparison
Token pricing
Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.
Coverage matters
Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.
This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.