Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Gemini 3.1 Pro

Google · US  |  Google · US · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Both are Google models. Gemini 3.1 Pro is the newer, generally stronger default; reach for Gemini 2.5 Pro when its lower price or a specific cost or latency profile matters more than the latest capabilities.

Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemini 3.1 Pro are both Google models, so the real question is not which lab to trust but which tier fits your workload and budget. Gemini 2.5 Pro is google's previous-gen 2M flagship — still a strong long-context multimodal option. Gemini 3.1 Pro is a 1M-token multimodal workhorse — huge breadth across text, image, audio and video, but recall fades deep in the window. Since both come from the same lab, the comparison below focuses on the tier-and-cost trade-offs that actually separate them.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecGemini 2.5 ProGemini 3.1 Pro
ProviderGoogle (US) Google (US)
ReleasedJune 2025 February 19, 2026
Context window1M (~1,500 pages) 1M (~1,573 pages)
Price (in/out)$1.25/$10 per 1M tokens $2/$12 per 1M tokens
Open weight?No — API only No — API only
Modalitiestext, image, audio, video, code text, image, audio, video, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published 26.3%

Who wins what

1M context via API

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro is comparatively weak here — long-context recall drops sharply past 256K (26.3% on MRCR v2 at 1M)

Strong multimodal reasoning

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Google's previous-gen 2M flagship — still a strong long-context multimodal option — and it runs cheaper at $1.25/$10 per 1M tokens.

Science and maths benchmarks

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Gemini 2.5 Pro lists science and maths benchmarks among its strengths; Gemini 3.1 Pro does not.

Full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1M-token window

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 2.5 Pro is comparatively weak here — recall degrades on very long inputs

Long video and document analysis

Gemini 3.1 Pro

A 1M-token multimodal workhorse — huge breadth across text, image, audio and video, but recall fades deep in the window — and it is the newer of the two.

Agentic reasoning (high ARC-AGI-2)

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro lists agentic reasoning (high ARC-AGI-2) among its strengths; Gemini 2.5 Pro does not.

Lowest cost at scale

Gemini 2.5 Pro

At $1.25/$10 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Gemini 2.5 Pro

At $1.25/$10 per 1M tokens it undercuts Gemini 3.1 Pro, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.

Anyone whose priority is 1m context via api

Gemini 2.5 Pro

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1m-token window

Gemini 3.1 Pro

That is its strongest area.

Gemini 2.5 Pro: where it fits

Google's previous-gen 2M flagship — still a strong long-context multimodal option. Released June 2025 by Google, it is built for 1M context via API, strong multimodal reasoning, science and maths benchmarks, and whole-book and video analysis.

Its trade-offs are real: superseded by 3.x for newest features, and recall degrades on very long inputs. At $1.25 in / $10 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

Gemini 3.1 Pro: where it fits

A 1M-token multimodal workhorse — huge breadth across text, image, audio and video, but recall fades deep in the window. Released February 19, 2026 by Google, it is built for full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1M-token window, long video and document analysis, agentic reasoning (high ARC-AGI-2), and broad multimodal understanding across formats.

Its trade-offs: long-context recall drops sharply past 256K (26.3% on MRCR v2 at 1M), premium price per token at $2/$12, and superseded within Google's own line by the newer 3.5/3.6 Flash releases for cost-sensitive work. At $2 in / $12 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

Because Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemini 3.1 Pro come from the same lab (Google), they share the same training philosophy and ecosystem — the decision is purely tier vs. cost. Gemini 3.1 Pro is the more capable, more recent option; the other earns its place only when its price or latency profile fits a specific job better. Most teams should default to Gemini 3.1 Pro and drop down only with a concrete reason.

Want both Gemini 2.5 Pro and Gemini 3.1 Pro without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemini 3.1 Pro better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Gemini 2.5 Pro leans toward 1m context via api while Gemini 3.1 Pro leans toward full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1m-token window, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper — $1.25/$10 per 1M tokens vs $2/$12 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.6× apart on input.

Which has the bigger context window?

Effectively neither — 1M vs 1M is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.

Should I upgrade from Gemini 2.5 Pro to Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Since both are Google models, the newer one (Gemini 3.1 Pro) is usually the better default unless you need a specific cost or latency profile from the other.

Which is newer, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Gemini 3.1 Pro — released February 19, 2026, about 9 months after Gemini 2.5 Pro.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.