Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Grok 4.7
Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro and Grok 4.7 side-by-side.
Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Grok 4.7 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.
Models in this comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Grok 4.7 on Vision Evals
Gemini 3.1 Pro scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 3.1 Pro leads 67.4% to 40.4%.
Overall, Gemini 3.1 Pro averages 83.3% (#6 of 54) against 71.9% (#22 of 54) for Grok 4.7.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is both cheaper ($0.0093 vs $0.012 per sample) and faster (7.8s vs 23.6s per sample).
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Grok 4.7 Comparison Table
Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026
| Property | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | SpaceXAI | |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | — |
| Release Date | Feb 2026 | Sep 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 500K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $1.60 |
| Output $/1M | $12.00 | $4.80 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 83.3% | 71.9% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0093 | $0.012 |
| Avg speed / sample | 7.81s | 23.55s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 67.4% | 40.4% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 39.8 to 41.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 41.2% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 39.6 to 42.8 |
| Counting (low) | 71.6% | 61.7% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 63.5 |
| Counting (high) | – | 60.8% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.5 to 62.2 |
| Identification (low) | 100.0% | 87.5% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | – | 80.2% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 81.3 |
| OCR (low) | 92.6% | 92.6% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.1 to 93.4 |
| OCR (high) | – | 93.5% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.1 to 93.8 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 95.9% | 84.9% ±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.5 to 87.6 |
| Data Extraction (high) | – | 87.6% ±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 89.7 |
| Reasoning (low) | 72.2% | 64.2% ±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.3 to 66.9 |
| Reasoning (high) | 74.8% | 66.9% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.6 to 68.2 |
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Grok 4.7: Overview
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.
Grok 4.7 is a proprietary model from SpaceXAI, released on September 21, 2026. It accepts text and images as input and returns text. It extends Grok 4.6 and is listed at the same API price.
Its Vision Evals scores are on the leaderboard. Running it in the Playground is not available yet, because the inference workflow is not ready.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.1 Pro performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 83.3% (#6 of 54) against 71.9% (#22 of 54) for Grok 4.7. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Gemini 3.1 Pro leads with 67.4% against 40.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0093 per sample against $0.012. Gemini 3.1 Pro is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $12.00 per 1M output; Grok 4.7 is priced at $1.60 per 1M input tokens and $4.80 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Gemini 3.1 Pro is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.8s per inference against 23.6s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.