Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Gemini 3.5 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 21 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
10.4
Output $/M
$0.40
0
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle
Coding
39.8
Overall
33.6
Output $/M
$9.00
21
vs boards won of 21 shared

Decision reading

Only Gemini 3.5 Flash has a coding score, 39.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has the edge where output tokens cost 22.5x less.

Shared results
21
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
7
Gemini 3.5 Flash only
89
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Gemini 3.5 Flash 39.8 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 76.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 19.0% against Gemini 3.5 Flash 95.6%, 76.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 against Gemini 3.5 Flash $9.00 per million output tokens, 22.5x apart.
Context window
Both take 1.05M tokens.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemini 2.5 Flash LiteBarsGemini 3.5 FlashTies
Coding02
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning04
Knowledge06
General06
All shared boards021
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1499Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)71.4%87.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured78.8%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured6.1%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured48.7%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured26.8%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured74.2%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured52.7%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)59.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
SciCodeNot measured53.9%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)4.5%46.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash
WeirdMLNot measured62.6%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
ALE-BenchNot measured911.0Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1493Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1494Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1495Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1522Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1504Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.433.6Gemini 3.5 Flash
Epoch Capabilities Index133.8154.9Gemini 3.5 Flash
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1202Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1197Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1175Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1190Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1098Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1180Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1142Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1179Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured57.9%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured21.6%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured30.8%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured63.5%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured5.7%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
τ²-Bench Telecom19.0%95.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash
APEX-AgentsNot measured27.5%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,396Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond70.2%92.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)75.4%88.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)62.5%92.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)6.8%42.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured92.8%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
ARC-AGINot measured92.5%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured72.1%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
SimpleBenchNot measured76.7%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured45.0%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured32.0%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
EBR-benchNot measured4.8%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1488Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1495Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1483Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1323Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1330Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
AIME42.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
AA Math Index53.3Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)53.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured95.6%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured62.8%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured26.8%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
ProofBenchNot measured31.0%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1504Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1495Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro79.1%89.5%Gemini 3.5 Flash
LegalBench (Vals AI)82.0%83.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash
CorpFin (Vals AI)57.6%64.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%74.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash
MortgageTax (Vals AI)57.6%68.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash
MedQA (Vals AI)88.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MedCode (Vals AI)34.2%55.8%Gemini 3.5 Flash
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)75.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured66.2%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1495Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1483Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1488Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1467Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1268Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1273Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1263Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1236Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1244Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1266Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1254Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1254Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured59.5%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
SAGE (Vals AI)30.8%49.9%Gemini 3.5 Flash
MedScribe (Vals AI)75.8%76.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured62.9%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
IFBench49.9%76.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)55.7%74.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash
DTBench62.8%94.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash
LMCA18.1%47.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured58.1%Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena TextNot measured1482Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1467Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1470Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1308Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1481Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1475Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1527Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1494Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1486Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1448Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1490Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1480Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1493Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1516Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1481Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1483Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1478Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1459Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1305Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1377Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1317Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1321Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1301Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1463Only Gemini 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGemini 3.5 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.0003Fits in one request
Gemini 3.5 Flash$0.0060Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.0062Fits in one request
Gemini 3.5 Flash$0.102Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.024Fits in one request
Gemini 3.5 Flash$0.390Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Gemini 3.5 Flash
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteGoogle Gemini 3.5 Flash
MakerGoogleGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 22, 2025May 19, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.10$1.50
Output $/Mtok$0.40$9.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked39.8
Independent measurements behind it04
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.21
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite better than Gemini 3.5 Flash for coding?

Only Gemini 3.5 Flash has a coding score, 39.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has the edge where output tokens cost 22.5x less.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.5 Flash costs $1.50 and $9.00. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 3.5 Flash only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Neither: both take 1.05M tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Gemini 3.5 Flash comparison based on?

21 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Gemini 3.5 Flash's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next