Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Mistral Medium 3.1
Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro and Mistral Medium 3.1 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, and OCR.
Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Mistral Medium 3.1 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Mistral Medium 3.1: 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.
Mistral Medium 3.1, released in August 2025 as the mistral-medium-2508 update, is a proprietary frontier model from Mistral AI positioned between smaller open models and high-end closed LLMs. It is multimodal, handling both text and image inputs, with a context window of ~128K tokens.
Compared to Mistral Medium 3.0, the 3.1 release introduces improvements in reasoning, coding, STEM, and enterprise workflows, along with better tone control for conversational and business applications. It is designed for scalable enterprise deployments, including hybrid cloud and on-premises VPC setups. As part of Mistral’s Premier line, Medium 3.1 is a commercial-only offering: while it delivers strong accuracy and performance, trade-offs include higher costs than open-weight models, restricted fine-tuning access, and increased latency/cost for very large contexts.
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Mistral Medium 3.1 Comparison Table
| Property | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Mistral | |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Feb 2026 | Aug 2025 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 128K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $0.400 |
| Output $/1M | $12.00 | $2.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 66 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Overall Score | 75.76% | |
| Avg Response Time | 6.13s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.1K | |
| Median output tokens | 11 | |
| 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) | |
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