Roboflow

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GPT-5.6 Terra

Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro and GPT-5.6 Terra side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.

Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GPT-5.6 Terra live

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

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GoogleGemini 3.1 Pro
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-5.6 Terra
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GPT-5.6 Terra: 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.

GPT-5.6 Terra

GPT-5.6 Terra is the mid-tier reasoning model in OpenAI's GPT-5.6 family, which also includes the flagship Sol and the lightweight Luna. Introduced in a limited preview on June 26, 2026, and made broadly available on July 9, 2026, Terra accepts text and image input and produces text output, supporting vision, function calling, tool use, and agentic workflows. It is designed as a balanced option for everyday professional and production workloads — including coding assistance, document analysis, customer support, and multi-step agent tasks — where both output quality and cost efficiency matter. OpenAI positions Terra as delivering performance competitive with GPT-5.5 at approximately half the price, with a context window of around 1,050,000 tokens. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, Terra scores 84.3%, matching Claude Fable 5 on that benchmark. Under OpenAI's Preparedness Framework, Terra is rated High for cybersecurity and biological capabilities, meaning it demonstrates meaningful capability in those domains without reaching the Critical threshold.

GPT-5.6 introduces a new naming convention in which the generation number (5.6) is paired with a durable capability tier name (Sol, Terra, or Luna), allowing each tier to advance on its own schedule. Terra carries the API identifier gpt-5.6-terra and supports the same reasoning effort controls available across the family, including adjustable reasoning depth. The model includes prompt caching with explicit cache breakpoints and a 30-minute minimum cache life, with cache writes billed at 1.25x the uncached input rate and cache reads receiving a 90% discount. GPT-5.6 Terra is a proprietary, closed-weights model served through the OpenAI API, Codex, and ChatGPT.

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GPT-5.6 Terra Comparison Table

PropertyGemini 3.1 ProGPT-5.6 Terra
OrganizationGoogleOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateFeb 2026Jul 2026
Context Window1.0M1.1M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$2.50
Output $/1M$12.00$15.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
ClassificationDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Foundation 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