Claude Opus 4.6
VS
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: which wins at real work?
22 task areas · same graded test runs · rank comparison only, so 0–100 and Elo collections never mix raw scores.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview wins 13 of 22 task areas we tested; Claude Opus 4.6 takes 9. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview costs 2.1× less per token ($14 vs $30 per 1M).
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview costs 2.1× less per token ($14 vs $30 per 1M).
Task by task
| Task area | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Structured Output |
#98
/ 113
Strong
|
#15
/ 113
Excellent
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Customer Support |
#81
/ 113
Usable
|
#2
/ 113
Strong
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| RAG, Safety & Grounding |
#59
/ 113
Excellent
|
#8
/ 113
Excellent
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Knowledge & Docs |
#66
/ 110
Usable
|
#19
/ 110
Strong
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Coding |
#18
/ 115
Excellent
|
#64
/ 115
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Presentations & Decks |
#54
/ 110
Excellent
|
#24
/ 110
Excellent
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Summarization & Meeting Notes |
#34
/ 110
Excellent
|
#4
/ 110
Excellent
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Data & Analytics |
#10
/ 110
Excellent
|
#39
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| AI Strategy |
#5
/ 126
Strong
|
#33
/ 126
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Sales |
#4
/ 110
Strong
|
#32
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Product & Project Management |
#45
/ 110
Strong
|
#25
/ 110
Excellent
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Frontend & Landing Pages |
#51
/ 109
Needs editing
|
#34
/ 109
Needs editing
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Research & Competitive Analysis |
#29
/ 110
Strong
|
#42
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Translation & Localization |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#14
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Landing Pages |
#23
/ 72
Strong
|
#14
/ 72
Strong
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Legal & HR |
#8
/ 110
Excellent
|
#17
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Chef / Home Cooking |
#12
/ 126
Strong
|
#6
/ 126
Strong
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Creative & Comedy | #10 / 110 | #4 / 110 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Investor & Pitch |
#8
/ 66
Strong
|
#13
/ 66
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Executive Assistant |
#18
/ 112
Strong
|
#14
/ 112
Strong
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Content & Brand |
#14
/ 124
Strong
|
#11
/ 124
Strong
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
| Training & Education |
#1
/ 110
Excellent
|
#4
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.6 |
Rank = position among every model config we tested in that task area (lower is better). Sorted by biggest gap first.
Same task, both models — judged
Both models answered the same test case; an independent judge graded each. Quotes are the judge's actual rationale.
Coding
Password-reset token security review (Northwind) (Code Review & Security)
“The model provides an exceptional, adversarial code review that accurately identifies and prioritizes all high-severity security issues. The proposed fixes address the root causes effectively, use standard cryptographic practices, and do not introduce new vulnerabilities or hallucinate APIs.”
“The model triggered a false-positive safety refusal and completely failed to perform the requested code review.”
Frequently asked
Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Across 22 task areas we benchmarked, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks higher in 13 and Claude Opus 4.6 in 9.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview costs 2.1× less per token ($14 vs $30 per 1M).
What is Claude Opus 4.6 better at?
Claude Opus 4.6 out-ranks Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview at Coding, Data & Analytics, AI Strategy.
What is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better at?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview out-ranks Claude Opus 4.6 at Structured Output, Customer Support, RAG, Safety & Grounding.
More comparisons
This page is Spring Prompt, running in public
We just did this for every model. Do it for your prompt.
The rankings above come from running real tasks through real models and scoring every output. Spring Prompt is that same engine — pointed at your prompt, your test cases, and your definition of good.
- Generate test cases from your prompt — no eval set required to start.
- Compare models side by side with quality, cost and latency in one matrix.
- Optimise the winner until the scores say it's ready to ship.
Prompt × model results
12 test cases · 3 evals