Gemini 3.1 Pro Google 1000000
💰 Total Cost Calculation (from Plugin)
Output: $0.012000 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Output: $0.012000 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Unit: $0.000000
Fees: $0.000000
Advanced Cost Breakdown (from Plugin)
Detailed Cost Analysis (from Plugin)
For 100,000 input tokens and 2,000 output tokens:
- Input Cost: $0.100000
- Output Cost: $0.012000 (rounded ~ $0.01)
- Total Cost: $0.067000 (rounded ~ $0.07)
- Cost per 1K tokens: $0.000657
- Tokens per dollar: 1,522,388 tokens
- Context Window: 1000000 tokens
Speed & Performance Analysis
With a processing speed of 400 tokens per second and 220ms time to first token:
- Processing Time: 4 minutes, 20.28 seconds
- Latency: 220 milliseconds to first token
- Base Throughput: 400 tokens/second
- Effective Throughput: 392 tokens/second (temperature-adjusted)
Best Use Cases
Want this applied to YOUR actual stack?
This calculator shows the math for Gemini 3.1 Pro. Your decision needs more — current infrastructure, compliance requirements, actual workload patterns, volume tiers — that change which model is right for you.
Get a $39 personalized AI Architecture Audit. PDF tailored to your stack, delivered in under 60 seconds. 7-day no-questions-asked refund.
Get my instant AI audit — $39 →Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic 1000000
💰 Total Cost Calculation (from Plugin)
Output: $0.012500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Output: $0.012500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Unit: $0.000000
Fees: $0.000000
Advanced Cost Breakdown (from Plugin)
Detailed Cost Analysis (from Plugin)
For 100,000 input tokens and 2,000 output tokens:
- Input Cost: $0.125000 (rounded ~ $0.13)
- Output Cost: $0.012500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
- Total Cost: $0.081250 (rounded ~ $0.08)
- Cost per 1K tokens: $0.000797
- Tokens per dollar: 1,255,385 tokens
- Context Window: 1000000 tokens
Speed & Performance Analysis
With a processing speed of 260 tokens per second and 400ms time to first token:
- Processing Time: 6 minutes, 40.33 seconds
- Latency: 400 milliseconds to first token
- Base Throughput: 260 tokens/second
- Effective Throughput: 255 tokens/second (temperature-adjusted)
Best Use Cases
Want this applied to YOUR actual stack?
This calculator shows the math for Claude Opus 4.7. Your decision needs more — current infrastructure, compliance requirements, actual workload patterns, volume tiers — that change which model is right for you.
Get a $39 personalized AI Architecture Audit. PDF tailored to your stack, delivered in under 60 seconds. 7-day no-questions-asked refund.
Get my instant AI audit — $39 →✨ Market Recommendations AI Model Registry
← Back to Gemini 3.1 Pro| Rank | AI Model & Provider | Total Cost | vs Gemini 3.1 Pro | vs Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏆 |
Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic
|
$0.003250 Best Value | ↓ 95.1% cheaper | ↓ 96% cheaper |
| 🥈 |
GPT-6 Luna
OpenAI
|
$0.003250 | ↓ 95.1% cheaper | ↓ 96% cheaper |
| 🥉 |
GPT-5.6 Luna
OpenAI
|
$0.003350 | ↓ 95% cheaper | ↓ 95.9% cheaper |
| #4 |
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Google
|
$0.004188 | ↓ 93.8% cheaper | ↓ 94.8% cheaper |
| #5 |
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Google
|
$0.005375 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 92% cheaper | ↓ 93.4% cheaper |
| #6 |
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Google
|
$0.005375 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 92% cheaper | ↓ 93.4% cheaper |
| #7 |
Mistral Large 3
Mistral AI
|
$0.007625 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 88.6% cheaper | ↓ 90.6% cheaper |
| #8 |
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Google
|
$0.012188 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 81.8% cheaper | ↓ 85% cheaper |
| #9 |
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Google
|
$0.012188 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 81.8% cheaper | ↓ 85% cheaper |
| #10 |
GPT-5.4 mini
OpenAI
|
$0.012563 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 81.3% cheaper | ↓ 84.5% cheaper |
| #11 |
Claude Haiku 4.5
Anthropic
|
$0.016250 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 75.7% cheaper | ↓ 80% cheaper |
| #12 |
Gemini 3.1 Flash
Google
|
$0.016750 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 75% cheaper | ↓ 79.4% cheaper |
| #13 |
Mistral Large 4
Mistral AI
|
$0.020790 | ↓ 69% cheaper | ↓ 74.4% cheaper |
| #14 |
GPT-5.3 Codex Spark
OpenAI
|
$0.031063 (rounded ~ $0.03) | ↓ 53.6% cheaper | ↓ 61.8% cheaper |
| #15 |
GPT-5.3 Instant
OpenAI
|
$0.031063 (rounded ~ $0.03) | ↓ 53.6% cheaper | ↓ 61.8% cheaper |
| #16 |
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic
|
$0.031250 (rounded ~ $0.03) | ↓ 53.4% cheaper | ↓ 61.5% cheaper |
| #17 |
Claude Sonnet 5
Anthropic
|
$0.032500 (rounded ~ $0.03) | ↓ 51.5% cheaper | ↓ 60% cheaper |
| #18 |
Gemini 4 Argon
Google
|
$0.032500 (rounded ~ $0.03) | ↓ 51.5% cheaper | ↓ 60% cheaper |
| #19 |
GPT-5.6 Terra
OpenAI
|
$0.033500 (rounded ~ $0.03) | ↓ 50% cheaper | ↓ 58.8% cheaper |
| #20 |
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Google
|
$0.044375 (rounded ~ $0.04) | ↓ 33.8% cheaper | ↓ 45.4% cheaper |
| #21 |
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Anthropic
|
$0.048750 (rounded ~ $0.05) | ↓ 27.2% cheaper | ↓ 40% cheaper |
| #22 |
Grok 4.3
xAI
|
$0.059000 (rounded ~ $0.06) | ↓ 11.9% cheaper | ↓ 27.4% cheaper |
| #23 |
Grok 4.20 Beta
xAI
|
$0.059000 (rounded ~ $0.06) | ↓ 11.9% cheaper | ↓ 27.4% cheaper |
| #24 |
Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic
|
$0.062500 (rounded ~ $0.06) | ↓ 6.7% cheaper | ↓ 23.1% cheaper |
| #25 |
GPT-6.1 Sol
OpenAI
|
$0.065000 (rounded ~ $0.07) | ↓ 3% cheaper | ↓ 20% cheaper |
| #26 |
GPT-6 Sol
OpenAI
|
$0.065000 (rounded ~ $0.07) | ↓ 3% cheaper | ↓ 20% cheaper |
| #27 |
GPT-5.6 Sol
OpenAI
|
$0.065000 (rounded ~ $0.07) | ↓ 3% cheaper | ↓ 20% cheaper |
| #28 |
Claude Opus 4.7
Anthropic
|
$0.081250 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 21.3% more | Same price |
| #29 |
Claude Opus 5
Anthropic
|
$0.081250 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 21.3% more | Same price |
| #30 |
Claude Opus 4.8
Anthropic
|
$0.081250 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 21.3% more | Same price |
| #31 |
Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic
|
$0.081250 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 21.3% more | Same price |
| #32 |
GPT-5.4
OpenAI
|
$0.083750 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 25% more | ↑ 3.1% more |
| #33 |
GPT-5.4 Thinking
OpenAI
|
$0.083750 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 25% more | ↑ 3.1% more |
| #34 |
GPT-5.5 Instant
OpenAI
|
$0.083750 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 25% more | ↑ 3.1% more |
| #35 |
Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
|
$0.153125 (rounded ~ $0.15) | ↑ 128.5% more | ↑ 88.5% more |
| #36 |
Claude Mythos 5.1
Anthropic
|
$0.153125 (rounded ~ $0.15) | ↑ 128.5% more | ↑ 88.5% more |
| #37 |
Claude Fable 5
Anthropic
|
$0.162500 (rounded ~ $0.16) | ↑ 142.5% more | ↑ 100% more |
| #38 |
Claude Mythos 5
Anthropic
|
$0.162500 (rounded ~ $0.16) | ↑ 142.5% more | ↑ 100% more |
| #39 |
GPT-5.5
OpenAI
|
$0.167500 (rounded ~ $0.17) | ↑ 150% more | ↑ 106.2% more |
| #40 |
GPT-6 Astra
OpenAI
|
$0.325000 (rounded ~ $0.33) | ↑ 385.1% more | ↑ 300% more |
| #41 |
GPT-5.2 Pro
OpenAI
|
$0.372750 (rounded ~ $0.37) | ↑ 456.3% more | ↑ 358.8% more |
| #42 |
GPT-5.2 Pro
OpenAI
|
$0.372750 (rounded ~ $0.37) | ↑ 456.3% more | ↑ 358.8% more |
Claude Haiku 5.5 Anthropic
GPT-6 Luna OpenAI
GPT-5.6 Luna OpenAI
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash Google
Mistral Large 3 Mistral AI
Gemini 3.8 Flash Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash Google
GPT-5.4 mini OpenAI
Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic
Gemini 3.1 Flash Google
Mistral Large 4 Mistral AI
GPT-5.3 Codex Spark OpenAI
GPT-5.3 Instant OpenAI
Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5 Anthropic
Gemini 4 Argon Google
GPT-5.6 Terra OpenAI
Gemini 2.5 Pro Google
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Anthropic
Grok 4.3 xAI
Grok 4.20 Beta xAI
Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic
GPT-6.1 Sol OpenAI
GPT-6 Sol OpenAI
GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI
Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic
Claude Opus 5 Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic
GPT-5.4 OpenAI
GPT-5.4 Thinking OpenAI
GPT-5.5 Instant OpenAI
Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic
Claude Mythos 5.1 Anthropic
Claude Fable 5 Anthropic
Claude Mythos 5 Anthropic
GPT-5.5 OpenAI
GPT-6 Astra OpenAI
GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI
GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI
Financial earnings analysis requires high precision when parsing 100-page 10-K filings. When processing 100,000-token documents, developers must weigh the need for structured extraction against the model’s ability to maintain context across dense financial tables and nuanced risk disclosures.
Gemini 3.1 Pro excels in scenarios where the workload involves multi-document synthesis or processing embedded charts within the filing. Its handling of massive context windows allows for comprehensive review of multiple years of earnings data without losing track of long-term trends or consolidated footnote details. This makes it a strong candidate for broad research tasks where connecting disparate signals across a large data corpus is the primary objective.
In contrast, Claude Opus 4.7 is often the preferred choice for tasks requiring high-fidelity logical reasoning and strict adherence to specific output schemas. When transforming unstructured text into structured JSON for an in-game NPC dialogue system or an automated financial dashboard, Claude’s ability to follow complex, multi-step instructions minimizes hallucinated figures and improves structural reliability.
For indie developers, the choice often hinges on the specific requirement of the financial pipeline. If your primary goal is summarizing vast amounts of historical data across several filings, the larger context handling of Gemini is beneficial. However, for precise extraction of quarterly revenue, EPS, and specific GAAP adjustments, Claude’s reasoning capabilities offer a higher degree of reliability. Both models perform well for this use case, but benchmarking them against your specific 10-K structure is essential before committing to a long-term production pipeline.