Gemini 3.0 ProvsComposer 2.5
Gemini 3.0 Pro | Composer 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmarks | ||
Next.js EvalsNext.js coding — Vercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 52% | 81% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 54% |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 76.2% | — |
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 79.8% |
DeepSWE 1.0Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | — | 18% |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 73% |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 69.3% |
ARC-AGI-2Abstract reasoning — Puzzle-style tests of abstract reasoning and pattern-finding — the kind of thing people find easy but AIs often struggle with. Higher is better. | 31.1% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 91.9% | — |
MMMUMultimodal — Tests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 81% | — |
threejsevalCommunity preference (Three.js) — Every model gets the same prompt — "the Eiffel Tower", "a glass fishbowl", "a robot arm picking toys into a box" — and builds a 3D scene in Three.js. Real people then see two scenes side by side, names hidden, and vote for the one they prefer. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on threejseval.com, averaged across all the prompts. It measures whether the scene looks and moves right to a human eye, not whether the code passes a test. Higher is better. | — | 1120 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | SpaceXAI | |
| Release date | Nov 18 2025 | May 18 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Other comparisons
Gemini 3.0 ProvsClaude Fable 5.1Composer 2.5vsClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.0 ProvsGPT-6 AstraComposer 2.5vsGPT-6 AstraGemini 3.0 ProvsMuse Spark 1.3Composer 2.5vsMuse Spark 1.3Gemini 3.0 ProvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashComposer 2.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGemini 3.0 ProvsMistral Medium 3.5Composer 2.5vsMistral Medium 3.5Gemini 3.0 ProvsKimi K3Composer 2.5vsKimi K3
Frequently asked questions
Composer 2.5 leads Gemini 3.0 Pro on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Next.js Evals). Gemini 3.0 Pro shipped 181 days before Composer 2.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On Next.js Evals, Composer 2.5 leads at 81% vs Gemini 3.0 Pro at 52%.