Skip to content
OpenKey

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs GPT-5.2 Pro

GoogleOpenAIboth via one key, provider price + 3%

Both are current frontier models, released three months apart (GPT-5.2 Pro on 2025-12-10, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview on 2026-02-19). The gap that matters isn't intelligence — it's price and context. Gemini costs a fraction of GPT-5.2 Pro per token and handles over 2.6x the input length, while GPT-5.2 Pro counters with a wider reasoning-effort range and a larger max output. Both run on OpenKey with one key and a flat 3% fee on top of provider pricing.

Spec vs spec

SpecGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGPT-5.2 Pro
Context window1.0M400K
Max output66K128K
Input modalitiesaudio, file, image, text, videoimage, text, file
Output modalitiestexttext
ReleasedFeb 19, 2026Dec 10, 2025
Reasoningalways onalways on

Pricing

Per 1M tokens. Provider price plus the flat 3% fee — the sum is what you pay.

openkey.ai

google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview

Input · 1M tokens

$2.00 + 3%$2.06

Output · 1M tokens

$12.00 + 3%$12.36

Cache read · 1M tokens

$0.200 + 3%$0.206

Cache write · 1M tokens

$0.375 + 3%$0.386

FEE — FLAT, EVERY MODEL3%

openkey.ai

openai/gpt-5.2-pro

Input · 1M tokens

$21.00 + 3%$21.63

Output · 1M tokens

$168.00 + 3%$173.04

FEE — FLAT, EVERY MODEL3%

One workload, priced on both

10M input + 2M output tokens at each model's price, flat 3% fee included.

google/gemini-3.1-pro-previewCheaper

$45.32

$44.00 provider + 3%

openai/gpt-5.2-pro

$562.38

$546.00 provider + 3%

Pricing math on a real workload

Take a 10M-input / 2M-output job — a reasonable stand-in for a batch coding or document-processing run. On OpenKey, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview costs $44.00 for that workload; GPT-5.2 Pro costs $546.00. That's a 12.4x difference for the same shape of job.

The per-token math: Gemini's provider price is $2.00/M input and $12.00/M output; OpenKey adds the flat 3% fee, landing at $2.06/M input and $12.36/M output. GPT-5.2 Pro's provider price is $21.00/M input and $168.00/M output, becoming $21.63/M input and $173.04/M output on OpenKey ($21.00 × 1.03 and $168.00 × 1.03). The input price ratio is 0.1 — Gemini's input tokens cost one-tenth of GPT-5.2 Pro's. Gemini also supports cache reads at $0.20/M and cache writes at $0.375/M provider-side; GPT-5.2 Pro has no listed cache pricing in this data.

Context and output limits

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts up to 1,048,576 tokens of context — 2.62x GPT-5.2 Pro's 400,000-token window. If your workload involves ingesting large codebases, long transcripts, or multi-document retrieval in a single call, Gemini's window gives you more room before you need to chunk or summarize.

GPT-5.2 Pro wins on the output side: it can generate up to 128,000 tokens per response versus Gemini's 65,536. For tasks that produce very long single outputs — extensive reports, full applications generated in one pass — GPT-5.2 Pro's ceiling is roughly double.

Coding and agentic benchmarks

The research data includes Design Arena and Artificial Analysis scores for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview but no benchmark data for GPT-5.2 Pro, so a head-to-head score comparison isn't possible here — treat GPT-5.2 Pro's real-world coding performance as unverified against this dataset.

What we do have: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview posts an Artificial Analysis coding index of 68.8, an intelligence index of 46.5, and an agentic index of 21.4. On Design Arena's model-level categories it ranks well in SVG generation (rank 2, 70.3% win rate) and ASCII art (rank 4, 63.4% win rate), with weaker showings in game dev (rank 26) and 3D (rank 17). In the agent-arena categories it's mid-pack — rank 5 on agentic HTML slides, rank 25 on Android-native tasks.

Reasoning effort and modalities

Both models require reasoning mode — it's mandatory, not optional. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview offers low, medium, and high effort (default: medium). GPT-5.2 Pro offers medium, high, and xhigh (default: medium), giving it a top tier Gemini doesn't have — relevant if you need to push reasoning depth beyond what Gemini's high setting delivers.

Modality is the other split. Gemini accepts audio, file, image, text, and video input; GPT-5.2 Pro accepts image, text, and file only. If your pipeline needs audio or video input directly (not pre-transcribed), Gemini is the only option of the two. Both output text only.

Which model for which job

Use casePickWhy
High-volume batch coding jobsGemini 3.1 Pro Preview$44.00 vs $546.00 on a 10M-in/2M-out workload — a 12.4x cost difference
Long-document or large-codebase ingestionGemini 3.1 Pro Preview1,048,576-token context is 2.62x GPT-5.2 Pro's 400,000-token limit
Audio or video input pipelinesGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewOnly model of the two with audio and video input modalities
Single-response very long output (full app, long report)GPT-5.2 Pro128,000 max output tokens vs Gemini's 65,536
Tasks needing maximum reasoning depthGPT-5.2 ProOnly model offering an xhigh reasoning effort tier
Cost-sensitive prototyping with cachingGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewProvider-side cache read at $0.20/M and cache write at $0.375/M; GPT-5.2 Pro has no listed cache pricing

Questions

How much cheaper is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview than GPT-5.2 Pro?
On a 10M-input/2M-output workload, Gemini costs $44.00 on OpenKey versus $546.00 for GPT-5.2 Pro — a 12.4x difference. The input price ratio alone is 0.1, meaning Gemini's input tokens cost one-tenth of GPT-5.2 Pro's per-token rate.
Which model has a bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview supports 1,048,576 tokens of context, 2.62x GPT-5.2 Pro's 400,000-token limit. If you're processing large codebases or long documents in one call, Gemini gives you more headroom before chunking.
Can I compare coding benchmarks directly?
Not fully. This dataset has Design Arena and Artificial Analysis scores for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview (coding index 68.8, intelligence index 46.5) but no equivalent benchmark data for GPT-5.2 Pro, so a direct numeric comparison isn't possible from these inputs.
What reasoning effort levels does each model support?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview offers low, medium, and high effort, defaulting to medium. GPT-5.2 Pro offers medium, high, and xhigh, also defaulting to medium — its xhigh tier is the one option Gemini doesn't have.

Go deeper