Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
$666.00 / month- Input cost
- $546.00
- Output cost
- $120.00
- Per 1,000 calls
- $333.00
- Pricing profile
- standard
Source-tracked model comparison
gpt-5.6-sol vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: which costs less for a practical API workload?
Compare verified pricing and model limits for API pricing and workload fit across providers. The cost example uses a long-context research workload and does not assume equal model quality.
Direct cost answer: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is estimated at $666.00 per month and gpt-5.6-sol at $1,665.00 for 150,000 input tokens, 5,000 output tokens, and 2,000 monthly requests. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is $999.00 lower under these assumptions. This does not identify a quality winner.
Tracked facts
Pricing and model limits
Prices are USD per 1M tokens under each model's verified default profile.
| Field | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | gpt-5.6-sol |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| API model ID | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | gpt-5.6-sol |
| Input / 1M | $2.00 | $5.00 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.20 | $0.50 |
| Output / 1M | $12.00 | $30.00 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| Maximum output | 65,536 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Accepted input | text | text, image |
Example workload
Long-context research cost scenario
150,000 input and 5,000 output tokens per request, 2,000 monthly requests, and 10% cached input.
gpt-5.6-sol
$1,665.00 / month- Input cost
- $1,365.00
- Output cost
- $300.00
- Per 1,000 calls
- $832.50
- Pricing profile
- standard / short context
Cost result: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is $999.00 lower per month for these assumptions. This is a price comparison, not a model-quality ranking.
Questions to answer before choosing
- Which model meets the required quality threshold on representative inputs?
- How do output length, retries, and caching change the measured cost?
- Which provider and deployment path fit the team's operational requirements?
What this estimate leaves out
Models whose tracked context window is below the scenario input are excluded from the compatible-model table.
Latency, reliability, output quality, retries, regional processing, and provider-specific tool charges can change the practical decision.