Skip to content

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Verdict

Gemini 3.1 Pro leads 7–1 across 8 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro 7 · Kimi K2.7 Code 1 · higher isn't always better — see caveats.

Per-benchmark head-to-head

Reported scores — protocols may differ. How we compare

Sort
Gemini 3.1 ProKimi K2.7 Code

Capabilities

Math

Math: Evenly split 1–1 across 2 shared math benchmarks (largest gap: FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private, 26.83 vs 12.2 — single evaluator).

4 reproduced

Reasoning

Reasoning: Gemini 3.1 Pro leads 2–0 across 2 shared reasoning benchmarks (largest gap: SimpleQA Verified, 77.3 vs 39.2 — single evaluator).

4 reproduced

What the labs claim

Vendor claims — compare against the measured scores above. A claim is what a developer says about its own model, not an independent measurement.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Agentic / Tool Use

  • “Gemini 3.1 Pro was evaluated across a range of benchmarks, including reasoning, multimodal capabilities, agentic tool use, multi-lingual performance, and long-context.”
    deepmind.google2026

Multimodal

  • “a suite of highly capable, natively multimodal reasoning models”
    deepmind.google2026

Reasoning

  • “Gemini 3.1 Pro is Google's most advanced model for complex tasks.”
    deepmind.google2026

Kimi K2.7 Code

No vendor claims on file for Kimi K2.7 Code.

A higher number is not always a better model. Each score is task performance under a disclosed harness. Of the 16 measurements across 8 shared benchmarks, 16 single-evaluator or undisclosed-protocol reports; 75% are independently reproduced. Kimi K2.7 Code pricing is cross-check disputed — weigh cost claims with the same caution as benchmark wins. Follow any benchmark to its integrity grade before reading a win as decisive.

Follow the record

These models

Same tier

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs …

Kimi K2.7 Code vs …