Feb 24
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 — same prompts, same constraints, one-shot builds, and zero human edits — 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. 🎓 Skool community coming soon — exclusive content, direct access & Q&A. Founders lock in lowest pricing forever → https://snapperai.io/skool ⏱️ 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 — Where Gemini Lands 🧪 TEST 1 — PRD-Driven App Build (QuakeWatch) A real-time earthquake monitoring dashboard built from a detailed PRD: • Live USGS API integration • Interactive clustered map • Filterable event feed • Synced charts and stat panels • Performance and accessibility constraints 🎨 TEST 2 — Visual UI Rebuild (Stripe Homepage) Models receive screenshots of the real Stripe homepage and must reconstruct the page from images alone — matching layout, content, and UI components. 🧠 TEST 3 — Code Comprehension Suite A controlled engineering benchmark across a real codebase: • Bug fix • Framework migration • Multi-file refactor Strict fenced-output contract, one attempt per model, no agent loops. 📊 FULL BENCHMARK RESULTS (Comprehension Suite v1.4) 7 frontier coding models tested across bug fix, refactor, and migration tasks under identical constraints: • Gemini 3.1 Pro — 3/3 clean • GPT-5.2 — 3/3 (repair on refactor) • Gemini 3 Pro — 3/3 (repair on refactor) • GPT-5.2 Codex — 3/3 (repair on refactor) • Claude Opus 4.6 — 2/3 (format contract fail on bug fix) • Claude Opus 4.5 — 2/3 (format contract fail on bug fix) • DeepSeek V3.2 — 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 you’re 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. 🔍 WHAT THIS VIDEO COVERS ◆ Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Codex vs Opus on identical coding tests ◆ PRD-driven builds vs screenshot-based UI reconstruction ◆ Code comprehension: bug fix, migration, refactor ◆ Speed, cost, and reliability trade-offs ◆ Frontier coding model positioning 🧪 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. 🔗 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 🔔 SUBSCRIBE AI coding workflows, agent tooling tutorials, structured benchmarks, and real-world model comparisons. 🌐 https://snapperai.io 🐦 https://x.com/SnapperAI 🧑💻 https://github.com/snapper-ai 🎓 https://snapperai.io/skool