Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Grok 4.5
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.5 in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.0 to 21.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 52.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and 96.5% for Grok 4.5.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 55.0 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2026-07-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 500K |
| Max output | — | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $6 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.4 (#181), Grok 4.5: 51.7 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1473 |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.8% |
| FrontierCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1552 |
| SciCode | — | 54.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 46.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | 47.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,309 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#15)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.2% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 47.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 23.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 65.4% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1213 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,887 |
Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 21.2 (#203), Grok 4.5: 56.0 (#23)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1324 | 1462 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 96.5% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 52.6% |
| SimpleBench | — | 70% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 83.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.2% |
| CritPt | — | 15.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 36% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| LMCA | — | 45.2% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 74.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 154.02 |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | — |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
Math Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.8 (#192), Grok 4.5: 60.7 (#29)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1309 | 1457 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 24.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 97.8% |
| ProofBench | — | 31% |
| Omni-MATH | 37.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 58.1% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.6 (#185), Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#21)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1305 | 1466 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 93.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 48.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | 72% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 30.6 (#103), Grok 4.5: 37.8 (#63)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1100 | 1287 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 27.3% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 22.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |
Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.2 (#156), Grok 4.5: 54.5 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1323 | 1439 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1339 | 1497 |
| LMArena French | 1346 | 1458 |
| LMArena German | 1306 | 1448 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1302 | 1425 |
| LMArena Korean | 1325 | 1402 |
| LMArena Russian | 1328 | 1447 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1313 | 1452 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.6 (#158), Grok 4.5: 76.3 (#45)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | 1446 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 78.3% | — |
| IFEval | 82.4% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#155), Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1321 | 1463 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.9 (#172), Grok 4.5: 65.9 (#40)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1330 | 1448 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1442 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1307 | 1457 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1579 |
| WildBench | 79% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Grok 4.5 better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.7 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Grok 4.5 share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.5 has 52.