Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Qwen Max

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Max costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Google

56.7

Rank #23 Confirmed

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 25.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 95.6% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and 16.1% for Qwen Max.
  • Qwen Max is cheaper at $1.60 / $6.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
  • Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.734.7
Released2026-02-192024-04-03
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M33K
Max output66K8K
Input $ / M tokens$2$1.60
Output $ / M tokens$12$6.40
Results tracked7123

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
LMArena Coding14841288
SWE-bench Verified75.6%—
DeepSWE11.7%—
Aider Polyglot—21.8%
LMArena WebDev1447—
SciCode58.9%—
GSO22.6%—
WeirdML72.1%—
MirrorCode8.9%—
ALE-Bench1,161—
AlgoTune2.02—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), Qwen Max: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents35.3%—
τ²-bench Banking26%—
DeepResearch Bench47.8%—
PostTrainBench22%—
BALROG57%—
ExploitBench26.1%—
GBAEval0.8%—
GDP.pdf17%—
LMArena Search1211—
METR Time Horizons77%—
Vending-Bench 23,774—

Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14851269
ARC-AGI-277.1%—
SimpleBench79.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)97.4%—
ARC-AGI-198%—
CritPt17.7%—
Chess Puzzles55%—
EnigmaEval36.8%—
Thematic Generalization79.4%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.1%—
LMCA53.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.77—
ForecastBench59—

Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%16.1%
LMArena Math14851275
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)36.9%1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions86.5%—
ProofBench26%—
MATH Level 5—67.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)16.7%—

Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
GPQA Diamond94.4%56.1%
LMArena Expert14851248
Humanity's Last Exam46.4%—
SimpleQA Verified73.5%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), Qwen Max: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
LMArena Vision1296—
Blueprint-Bench 226.5%—
Furniture Assembly26.7%—
LMArena Document1444—

Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
LMArena Non-English14771263
LMArena Chinese15291254
LMArena French14871330
LMArena German14911254
LMArena Japanese14931205
LMArena Korean14551142
LMArena Russian14981274
LMArena Spanish14791290

Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
LMArena Instruction Following14661262

Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
LMArena Longer Query14831288
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench20.8%—
CL-bench Life16.9%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen Max
LMArena Text14811282
LMArena Creative Writing14821248
LMArena Multi-Turn14881277
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1491—
EQ-Bench 41142—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Qwen Max?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Max costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.60 per million input tokens and $6.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen Max better for coding?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Qwen Max share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper