Gemini 2.5 Pro vs o3

Gemini 2.5 Pro undercuts o3 on input price and reaches much further on context, while o3 leads the most relevant coding and math benchmarks. Use this page to decide whether your workload needs Gemini's 1M-token multimodal window and lower batch/cache costs, or o3's stronger SWE-bench, GPQA, and AIME reasoning signal.

Pick o3 for enterprise coding agents, repository repair, and math-heavy reasoning when the workload fits under 200K tokens: it leads SWE-bench Verified at 71.7% versus 63.8%, GPQA Diamond at 87.7% versus 86.4%, and AIME 2025 at 88.9% versus 86.7%. Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro for long-context multimodal analysis, PDF/video/codebase review, repeated cached prompts, and cost-sensitive batch runs: it has a 1M-token context window versus 200K, standard input at $1.25/M versus $2/M, batch input at $0.625/M versus $1/M, and cache reads at $0.125/M versus $0.50/M. Default to Gemini when scale or cost is the bottleneck; switch to o3 when coding accuracy and reasoning depth matter more than context length.

Last reviewed: 2026-06-29. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.