Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT-5.5

GPT-5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 63.4 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 64× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 25 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Google

37.0

Rank #211 Confirmed

GPT-5.5 OpenAI

63.4

Rank #9 Confirmed

Summary

They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.5 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.5 leads 72.8 to 22.2.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 35.2% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 84.9% for GPT-5.5.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $30 for GPT-5.5.
GPT-5.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1.05M.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.5 specifications
	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
Provider	Google	OpenAI
Noometry Index	37.0	63.4
Released	2025-06-17	2026-04-23
Weights	Proprietary	Proprietary
Context window	1.05M	1.05M
Max output	66K	128K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.10	$5
Output $ / M tokens	$0.40	$30
Results tracked	33	71

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), GPT-5.5: 58.2 (#17)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
WeirdML	35.2%	84.9%
LMArena Coding	1373	1494
ALE-Bench	325.9	1,943
SWE-bench Verified	—	80.6%
DeepSWE	—	67%
FrontierCode	—	43%
LMArena WebDev	—	1513
SciCode	—	56.1%
GSO	—	40.2%
MirrorCode	—	10%

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), GPT-5.5: 50.7 (#6)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
Terminal-Bench	—	84.7%
APEX-Agents	—	55.1%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	36.9%	—
OSWorld 2.0	—	13%
Remote Labor Index	—	6.3%
τ²-bench Banking	—	44.6%
DeepResearch Bench	—	54%
PostTrainBench	—	27.2%
ExploitBench	—	47.4%
GBAEval	—	53.2%
GDP.pdf	—	26%
LMArena Search	—	1242
Vending-Bench 2	—	7,524

Reasoning GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), GPT-5.5: 72.8 (#11)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
Kagi LLM Benchmark	40.5%	88.8%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1377	1489
DTBench	62.8%	96%
LMCA	18.1%	54.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index	133.94	159.1
ARC-AGI-2	—	85%
SimpleBench	—	69%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	96.2%
ARC-AGI-1	—	95%
CritPt	—	27.1%
Chess Puzzles	—	54%
EBR-Bench	—	34.3%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	56%
Surface Evolver Bench	—	88.1%
Bench to the Future 3	—	0.14
ForecastBench	—	60.6

Math GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), GPT-5.5: 81.7 (#11)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
LMArena Math	1373	1486
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	85.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4	—	72.5%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions	—	94.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	100%
ProofBench	—	50%
Omni-MATH	48%	—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	—	51.7%
FrontierMath Erdős	—	0%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)	—	35.4%

Knowledge GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), GPT-5.5: 64.4 (#17)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
Vectara Hallucination Rate	3.3%	9.3%
LMArena Expert	1373	1508
GPQA Diamond	—	94%
SimpleQA Verified	—	63%
MMLU-Pro	53.7%	—
GPQA (HELM)	30.9%	—

Multimodal GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), GPT-5.5: 46.9 (#12)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
LMArena Vision	1198	1297
VPCT	30%	—
Blueprint-Bench 2	—	36.2%
Furniture Assembly	—	44.2%
LMArena Document	—	1486

Multilingual GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), GPT-5.5: 56.4 (#20)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
LMArena Non-English	1369	1467
LMArena Chinese	1404	1533
LMArena French	1388	1486
LMArena German	1389	1480
LMArena Japanese	1359	1498
LMArena Korean	1360	1460
LMArena Russian	1373	1473
LMArena Spanish	1396	1468

Instruction Following GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), GPT-5.5: 77.5 (#18)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
LMArena Instruction Following	1367	1479
IFEval	81%	—

Long Context GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), GPT-5.5: 48.3 (#12)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
LMArena Longer Query	1373	1484
Fiction.LiveBench	47.2%	—
CL-bench Life	—	22.2%

Writing & Preference GPT-5.5 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), GPT-5.5: 72.7 (#13)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.5
LMArena Text	1379	1472
LMArena Creative Writing	1367	1455
LMArena Multi-Turn	1366	1476
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1844
WildBench	81.8%	—
EQ-Bench 4	—	1315

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than GPT-5.5?

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or GPT-5.5?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.5 lists at $5 and $30.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or GPT-5.5 better for coding?

GPT-5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.2 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.5 share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.5 has 71.