Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs GPT-5.1-Codex

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.1-Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.3 vs 38.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Google

37.3

Rank #189 Confirmed

GPT-5.1-Codex OpenAI

38.2

Rank #178 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 41.7 to 37.4.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
ProviderGoogleOpenAI
Noometry Index37.338.2
Released2025-02-052025-11-12
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—400K
Max output—128K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.25
Output $ / M tokens—$10
Results tracked326

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.4 (#181), GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.7 (#107)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—66%
LMArena WebDev—1337
LiveBench Coding47.1%—
LMArena Coding1322—
ALE-Bench—1,245

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, GPT-5.1-Codex: 37.8 (#32)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
Terminal-Bench—60.4%
METR Time Horizons—70.8%

Reasoning Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 21.2 (#203), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Reasoning50.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1324—
DTBench52.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis65.5%—
ForecastBench57.1—
LiveBench54.3%—

Math Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.8 (#192), GPT-5.1-Codex: 29.3 (#218)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
ProofBench—9%
Omni-MATH37.4%—
LiveBench Math58.1%—
LMArena Math1309—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.6 (#185), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
MMLU-Pro72%—
GPQA (HELM)50%—
LMArena Expert1305—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 30.6 (#103), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Vision1100—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.2 (#156), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Non-English1323—
LMArena Chinese1339—
LMArena French1346—
LMArena German1306—
LMArena Japanese1302—
LMArena Korean1325—
LMArena Russian1328—
LMArena Spanish1313—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.6 (#158), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Instruction Following78.3%—
IFEval82.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following1305—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#155), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Longer Query1321—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.9 (#172), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text1330—
LMArena Creative Writing1319—
WildBench79%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1307—
LiveBench Language34.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than GPT-5.1-Codex?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.1-Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.3 vs 38.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or GPT-5.1-Codex better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.7 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.1-Codex share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.1-Codex has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper