Loading video player...
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GPT-5.3 Codex vs Claude Opus 4.6 on the same real-world coding benchmarks inside Cursor IDE. All models run under identical conditions β same prompts, same constraints, one-shot builds, and zero human edits β creating a controlled comparison across practical engineering tasks. In previous tests, Codex led on complex PRD-driven app builds and Opus led on visual UI reconstruction. This video adds Gemini 3.1 Pro to those benchmarks and introduces a new comprehension suite covering bug fixes, migrations, and refactors on a real codebase. π Skool community coming soon β exclusive content, direct access & Q&A. Founders lock in lowest pricing forever β https://snapperai.io/skool β±οΈ TIMESTAMPS 00:00 Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Codex vs Opus Intro 00:58 Codex QuakeWatch Benchmark Recap 01:38 Gemini QuakeWatch Build Review 03:16 Stripe UI Rebuild Test Overview 04:00 Opus Visual Benchmark Review 04:44 Gemini UI Rebuild Results 05:55 Code Comprehension Suite Overview 08:01 Full Benchmark Leaderboard (7 Models) 09:46 Gemini & Opus Model Improvements 10:41 Final Verdict β Where Gemini Lands π§ͺ TEST 1 β PRD-Driven App Build (QuakeWatch) A real-time earthquake monitoring dashboard built from a detailed PRD: β’ Live USGS API integration β’ Interactive clustered map β’ Filterable event feed β’ Synced charts and stat panels β’ Performance and accessibility constraints π¨ TEST 2 β Visual UI Rebuild (Stripe Homepage) Models receive screenshots of the real Stripe homepage and must reconstruct the page from images alone β matching layout, content, and UI components. π§ TEST 3 β Code Comprehension Suite A controlled engineering benchmark across a real codebase: β’ Bug fix β’ Framework migration β’ Multi-file refactor Strict fenced-output contract, one attempt per model, no agent loops. π FULL BENCHMARK RESULTS (Comprehension Suite v1.4) 7 frontier coding models tested across bug fix, refactor, and migration tasks under identical constraints: β’ Gemini 3.1 Pro β 3/3 clean β’ GPT-5.2 β 3/3 (repair on refactor) β’ Gemini 3 Pro β 3/3 (repair on refactor) β’ GPT-5.2 Codex β 3/3 (repair on refactor) β’ Claude Opus 4.6 β 2/3 (format contract fail on bug fix) β’ Claude Opus 4.5 β 2/3 (format contract fail on bug fix) β’ DeepSeek V3.2 β 1/3 Gemini 3.1 Pro is the only model in this run to pass all three tasks clean on the first attempt while meeting the strict fenced-output contract. This comparison shows where Gemini 3.1 Pro sits relative to Codex and Opus across generation, vision, and code comprehension tasks. If youβre building apps from a spec, reconstructing UI from screenshots, or modifying existing codebases with AI, this video shows exactly how the latest Gemini model performs against current coding leaders. π WHAT THIS VIDEO COVERS β Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Codex vs Opus on identical coding tests β PRD-driven builds vs screenshot-based UI reconstruction β Code comprehension: bug fix, migration, refactor β Speed, cost, and reliability trade-offs β Frontier coding model positioning π§ͺ IMPORTANT CONTEXT This comparison uses a single-agent Cursor setup with one-shot builds and strict output constraints. Results may differ in multi-agent workflows, iterative refinement loops, or alternative harnesses. This benchmark reflects controlled first-pass performance under identical conditions. π RELATED VIDEOS & SOURCES Gemini 3.1 Pro announcement https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/gemini-models/gemini-3-1-pro/ GLM-5 vs Codex vs Opus (same tests) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQILCWuQqdo Original Codex vs Opus benchmark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1I5fn9Du1c Original coding benchmark suite https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dMm8sHmtCs π SUBSCRIBE AI coding workflows, agent tooling tutorials, structured benchmarks, and real-world model comparisons. π https://snapperai.io π¦ https://x.com/SnapperAI π§βπ» https://github.com/snapper-ai π https://snapperai.io/skool