Head-to-head · frontier vs frontier

Gemini 3 Pro Vision vs o3 Pro: which model should you choose?

We compared Gemini 3 Pro Vision and o3 Pro on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. o3 Pro has the stronger average benchmark score; Gemini 3 Pro Vision is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

Google DeepMind

Gemini 3 Pro Vision

Gemini 3 Pro Vision is a frontier model from Google DeepMind. It offers a 200,000-token context window, costs $17.59 per million input tokens and $68.83 per million output tokens, and averages 85.5 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$17.59 / 1M
Output
$68.83 / 1M
Context
200,000
Avg score
85.5
Open weights
No
Full Gemini 3 Pro Vision page
OpenAI

o3 Pro

o3 Pro is a frontier model from OpenAI. It offers a 400,000-token context window, costs $17.89 per million input tokens and $81.48 per million output tokens, and averages 85.8 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$17.89 / 1M
Output
$81.48 / 1M
Context
400,000
Avg score
85.8
Open weights
No
Full o3 Pro page

Specification comparison

SpecGemini 3 Pro Visiono3 ProEdge
Input price / 1M$17.59$17.89A
Output price / 1M$68.83$81.48A
Context window200,000400,000B
Max output128,0008,192A
Average score85.585.8B
Arena Elo1458.11471.9B
Open weightsNoNoTie

Benchmark comparison

Gemini 3 Pro Vision wins 5, o3 Pro wins 7, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkGemini 3 Pro Visiono3 ProGapWinner
MMLU-Pro87.384.33.0Gemini 3 Pro Vision
GPQA Diamond80.678.71.9Gemini 3 Pro Vision
SWE-bench Verified76.576.90.4o3 Pro
HumanEval91.690.61.0Gemini 3 Pro Vision
MATH-50088.492.44.0o3 Pro
AIME 202587.383.53.8Gemini 3 Pro Vision
LiveCodeBench79.282.43.2o3 Pro
IFEval90.490.90.5o3 Pro
TruthfulQA84.588.43.9o3 Pro
HellaSwag91.192.51.4o3 Pro
MMMU83.683.10.5Gemini 3 Pro Vision
Arena Elo1458.11471.913.8o3 Pro

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Gemini 3 Pro Vision costs about $30.40 per million tokens and o3 Pro costs about $33.79. Gemini 3 Pro Vision is roughly 10% cheaper than o3 Pro. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

o3 Pro has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens, compared with 200,000 for Gemini 3 Pro Vision. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, Gemini 3 Pro Vision wins 5, o3 Pro wins 7, and 0 are tied. On the index average, o3 Pro leads Gemini 3 Pro Vision by 0.3 points (85.8 versus 85.5).

The price picture favours Gemini 3 Pro Vision. The context picture favours o3 Pro. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.

If you need a single default, start with o3 Pro for quality-sensitive work and Gemini 3 Pro Vision for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.

Choose Gemini 3 Pro Vision if

  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
  • You need the larger 128,000-token output limit.

Choose o3 Pro if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • You need the larger 400,000-token context window.

FAQ

Is Gemini 3 Pro Vision better than o3 Pro?

On the index average, o3 Pro leads Gemini 3 Pro Vision by 0.3 points (85.8 versus 85.5). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Gemini 3 Pro Vision wins 5 benchmarks, o3 Pro wins 7.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3 Pro Vision or o3 Pro?

Gemini 3 Pro Vision is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $30.40 per million tokens, versus $33.79 for o3 Pro.

Which has the larger context window?

o3 Pro has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens. Gemini 3 Pro Vision has 200,000 tokens.

Are these models open weights?

Gemini 3 Pro Vision is proprietary; o3 Pro is proprietary.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with o3 Pro for quality-sensitive work and Gemini 3 Pro Vision for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.

Related comparisons