Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Gemini 3.6 Pro delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,570 vs 1,470), while Gemini 3.6 Pro leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (74.6%), while Doubao Pro 1.5 is more budget-friendly at $0.28/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.
10 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost
ByteDance flagship enterprise model with ultra-low token cost and 128k context.
Current Google Pro-class multimodal model. Long context, strong coding, billed like the 3.x Pro tier.
Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost
Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.
Δ 100 Arena Elo pts
105 tok/s
$0.28 / 1M output
Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.
Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.
Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.
Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy
Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness
Cost per million tokens and max context window length
| Benchmark | Doubao Pro 1.5 | Gemini 3.6 Pro | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +100 | ||
| Coding Elo | +101 | ||
| LiveBench | +7.8% | ||
| SWE-bench | +12.5% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +6.9% | ||
| Time to first token | +15 ms | ||
| Output speed | 105 tok/s | 102 tok/s | +3 tok/s |
| Input price | $0.11/1M | $1.25/1M | +$1.14/1M |
| Output price | $0.28/1M | +$4.72/1M | |
| Context window | +1.9M |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
Doubao Pro 1.5 is estimated to save $110.70/month ($1,328/year).
Higher SWE-bench (74.6%).
Lower output list price ($0.28/1M).
Lower TTFT (190 ms).
Larger window (2M).
Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Gemini 3.6 Pro).
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Gemini 3.6 Pro | Higher SWE-bench (74.6%). |
| High-volume chat | Doubao Pro 1.5 | Lower output list price ($0.28/1M). |
| Voice / low-latency UI | Doubao Pro 1.5 | Lower TTFT (190 ms). |
| Long-document RAG | Gemini 3.6 Pro | Larger window (2M). |
| Screenshots / vision | Gemini 3.6 Pro | Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Gemini 3.6 Pro). |
3.7 Flash vs 3.6 Pro is the current Google volume-versus-upgrade pair.
Top Anthropic vs top Google. Usually Opus 5 vs 3.6 Pro. Two different invoices.
Hub remaps to top Google vs top OpenAI Elo. Usually 3.6 Pro vs Sol. Window vs price is the plot.
2M context, Pro-class Elo and coding. Upgrade path from Flash is this page, not a vibe check.
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/doubao-1-5-pro-128k-vs-gemini-3-6-pro/opengraph-image
Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry
compare · Aug 13, 2026
Gemini Flash vs Pro: when Flash is the whole product
compare · Jul 24, 2026
Claude vs Gemini: coding, Elo, and output price — not a brand mashup
compare · Jul 16, 2026
Gemini vs GPT: long context versus the OpenAI flagship invoice
launch · Jul 15, 2026
Gemini 3.6 Pro: Google’s current Pro-class long-context row