Gemini 3 Pro Vision on IFEval: score, rank and what it means
Gemini 3 Pro Vision scores 90.4 on IFEval, placing it #64 of 600 models in the index. The benchmark average is 78.6 and the leader is Claude Opus 4.5 Pro at 96.1.
Score distribution
The chart shows the top 10 models on IFEval, with Gemini 3 Pro Vision highlighted. Longer bars mean higher scores.
Top 10 leaderboard
| # | Model | Provider | Context | Input / 1M | Avg score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 4.5 Pro | Anthropic | 200000 | $20.98 | 89.1 |
| 2 | Claude Opus 4.5 Reasoning | Anthropic | 2000000 | $20.91 | 88.2 |
| 3 | GPT-5.2 Pro | OpenAI | 2000000 | $21.32 | 89.6 |
| 4 | GPT-5.2 Max | OpenAI | 1000000 | $21.39 | 89.2 |
| 5 | GPT-5.2 Reasoning | OpenAI | 1000000 | $20.98 | 87.5 |
| 6 | GPT-5.1 Pro | OpenAI | 200000 | $19.77 | 87.8 |
| 7 | Gemini 3 Pro Max | Google DeepMind | 2000000 | $20.57 | 87.9 |
| 8 | GPT-5.1 Reasoning | OpenAI | 400000 | $20.27 | 88.3 |
| 9 | Claude Opus 4.5 Max | Anthropic | 1000000 | $20.90 | 87.8 |
| 10 | o4 Reasoning | OpenAI | 1000000 | $19.69 | 87.5 |
What this score means
On IFEval, Gemini 3 Pro Vision sits at #64 of 600. The leader, Claude Opus 4.5 Pro, scores 96.1, so the gap to the top is 5.7 points. The median model in this index scores 81.2, which puts Gemini 3 Pro Vision above the midpoint.
Google DeepMind models average 85.7 on this benchmark. Gemini 3 Pro Vision is 4.7 points above that provider line, so it is a stronger result than the average Google DeepMind model.
Among frontier models, the average is 92.0. Gemini 3 Pro Vision is 1.6 points below that group. This is the more useful comparison if you are shortlisting within the same tier rather than across the whole index.
Read a 90.4 as a relative signal, not an absolute guarantee. Benchmark scores depend on prompt format, evaluation harness and contamination controls. Use this page to narrow the shortlist, then test the model on your own data.
Price context
At $17.59 per million input tokens, Gemini 3 Pro Vision is above the median input price of $4.00 across the 600 models scored on IFEval. The models immediately around it in the ranking are shown below so you can compare score and price together.
| Model | Provider | Context | Input / 1M | Avg score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini 2.5 Pro Turbo | Google DeepMind | 1000000 | $16.32 | 83.9 |
| Grok 3 Turbo | xAI | 128000 | $15.97 | 83.1 |
| o3 Reasoning | OpenAI | 200000 | $18.07 | 85.3 |
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | 1000000 | $15.71 | 82.4 |
| Gemini 3 Pro Vision | Google DeepMind | 200000 | $17.59 | 85.5 |
| Doubao 1.5 Pro Max | ByteDance | 400000 | $14.93 | 81.2 |
| Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision | Google DeepMind | 200000 | $14.91 | 82.0 |
Other benchmarks for Gemini 3 Pro Vision
| Benchmark | Score | Rank | Percentile | Relative |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 87.3 | 29 | 95th | |
| GPQA Diamond | 80.6 | 50 | 92th | |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.5 | 25 | 96th | |
| HumanEval | 91.6 | 28 | 95th | |
| MATH-500 | 88.4 | 65 | 89th | |
| AIME 2025 | 87.3 | 18 | 97th | |
| LiveCodeBench | 79.2 | 53 | 91th | |
| TruthfulQA | 84.5 | 74 | 88th | |
| HellaSwag | 91.1 | 61 | 90th | |
| MMMU | 83.6 | 15 | 98th | |
| Arena Elo | 1458.1 | 57 | 91th |
FAQ
What score does Gemini 3 Pro Vision get on IFEval?
Gemini 3 Pro Vision scores 90.4 on IFEval in this index. The benchmark average is 78.6 and the top score is 96.1.
How does Gemini 3 Pro Vision rank on IFEval?
It ranks #64 of 600 models, in the 89th percentile. The leader is Claude Opus 4.5 Pro at 96.1.
Is Gemini 3 Pro Vision good at IFEval?
Yes, relative to the index: it is above the median and inside the top half of scores. The result should be read alongside its price and context window.
How is the IFEval score calculated?
IFEval is a instruction following benchmark. Scores in this index are modelled estimates on a 0–100 scale (or Elo for Arena), derived from capability tier and benchmark difficulty. They are not official leaderboard results.
What does Gemini 3 Pro Vision cost?
Gemini 3 Pro Vision costs $17.59 per million input tokens and $68.83 per million output tokens.