Roboflow

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Google Vision OCR

Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro and Google Vision OCR side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in OCR.

Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Google Vision OCR live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
GoogleGemini 3.1 Pro
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGoogle Vision OCR
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Google Vision OCR: Overview

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro is a proprietary multimodal model from Google’s Gemini 3 series, released in early 2026 and designed for advanced reasoning across large multimodal datasets. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and documents, supporting up to a 1-million-token input context with up to 64k output tokens. Compared with Gemini 3 Pro, it improves long-context synthesis and multi-step reasoning, enabling more reliable analysis of large documents, datasets, and software codebases.

The model also advances visual understanding and grounding, allowing it to interpret UI screenshots, diagrams, and real-world scenes while referencing specific regions within images or video. These capabilities make Gemini 3.1 Pro well suited for multimodal workflows involving document processing, interface analysis, robotics research, and complex visual reasoning.

Google Vision OCR

Google Vision OCR, released as part of the Cloud Vision API’s general availability in February 2016, is a proprietary Google Cloud service for extracting text from images and documents. It supports common formats like JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF, and PDF, and provides two main modes: TEXT_DETECTION for short snippets and scene text, and DOCUMENT_TEXT_DETECTION for dense documents, which returns structured layout information with bounding boxes.

While not an LLM (so it has no token context window or parameter count), the service performs OCR across printed text and some handwriting. It outputs detected text along with positional metadata, making it useful for digitizing scanned files, receipts, forms, and signs. However, complex layouts like tables often require downstream processing. Accessible via REST and RPC APIs, with client libraries in major languages, Google Vision OCR is widely used for document processing pipelines, archival, and accessibility applications.

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Google Vision OCR Comparison Table

PropertyGemini 3.1 ProGoogle Vision OCR
OrganizationGoogleGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalvision
Release DateFeb 2026Feb 2016
Context Window1.0M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00
Output $/1M$12.00
Vision Tasks
OCRDemoDemo
CaptioningDemo
ClassificationDemo
Object DetectionDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 66 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
75.76%
Avg Response Time6.13s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.1K
Median output tokens11
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0024
Defect Detection
73.3%(11/15)
Document Understanding
88.9%(8/9)
Object Counting
44.4%(4/9)
Object Understanding
92.9%(13/14)
Spatial Understanding
73.7%(14/19)
OCR
Overall Score
89.52%
Avg Response Time3.11s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.1K
Median output tokens12
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0024
Focused Scene OCR
94.9%(94/99)
Handwritten Math
90%(9/10)
License Plate Recognition
90%(27/30)
Text Recognition
86.7%(26/30)
VQA & Extraction
81.7%(49/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology