Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs GPT-4o (2024-05-13)

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite leads GPT-4o (2024-05-13) on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.4 to 7.3, and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs 37.5x less per output token ($0.40 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 6 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.40
6
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
27.1
Output $/M
$15.00
0
vs boards won of 6 shared

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or GPT-4o (2024-05-13): which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 37.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $15.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 128K tokens).

Shared results
6
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
24
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) only
38
Like-for-like categories
4 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 25.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run): Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 59.3% against GPT-4o (2024-05-13) 33.4%, 25.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 against GPT-4o (2024-05-13) $15.00 per million output tokens, 37.5x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) 128K.

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 LiteBarsGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Ties
Coding10
Intelligence10
Reasoning30
Knowledge10
All shared boards60
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
AA Coding IndexNot measured24.2Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)71.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)59.3%33.4%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)4.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1297Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1297Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.47.3Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Epoch Capabilities Index133.8Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom19.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
METR time horizonsNot measured40.8%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
BALROGNot measured32.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)36.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
GPQA Diamond70.2%50.2%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)75.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)62.5%52.6%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)6.8%1.8%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured48.9%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1281Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1250Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1293Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
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 measured6.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
MATH level 5Not measured51.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1284Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1284Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
MMLU Pro79.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)82.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)57.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)57.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MedQA (Vals AI)88.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MedCode (Vals AI)34.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)75.9%74.0%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
MMLUNot measured84.2%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1295Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1278Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1314Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1262Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index26 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)30.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)75.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
IFBench49.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)55.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
DTBench62.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
LMCA18.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
LMArena TextNot measured1300Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1278Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1291Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1137Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1312Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1277Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1257Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1234Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1304Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1292Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1285Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1365Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1302Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1288Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1298Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1289Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1147Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1132Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 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 GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
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
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.013Fits 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
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.295Fits 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
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$1.15Exceeds the context window

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 GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 22, 2025May 13, 2024
Context window1.05M128K
Input $/Mtok$0.10$5.00
Output $/Mtok$0.40$15.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite better than GPT-4o (2024-05-13) for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 37.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $15.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 128K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or GPT-4o (2024-05-13)?

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-4o (2024-05-13) costs $5.00 and $15.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or GPT-4o (2024-05-13)?

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs GPT-4o (2024-05-13) comparison based on?

6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)'s on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next