Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs GPT-4o (2024-11-20)

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite leads GPT-4o (2024-11-20) on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.4 to 8.4, and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs 25.0x less per output token ($0.40 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 11 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.40
8
GPT-4o (2024-11-20)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
3
vs boards won of 11 shared

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or GPT-4o (2024-11-20): 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 25.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 128K tokens).

Shared results
11
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
19
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) only
13
Like-for-like categories
5 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 (2024-11-20) not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 28.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AIME: Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 42.1% against GPT-4o (2024-11-20) 11.9%, 30.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 against GPT-4o (2024-11-20) $10.00 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-4o (2024-11-20) 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 (2024-11-20)Ties
Coding10
Intelligence10
Reasoning20
Math11
Knowledge32
All shared boards83
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured18.2%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)71.4%43.4%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)59.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)4.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
GSO-BenchNot measured0.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
WeirdMLNot measured25.1%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
CybenchNot measured12.5%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 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 (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.48.4Gemini 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 index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom19.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
TheAgentCompanyNot measured8.6%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)36.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Leader
GPQA Diamond70.2%53.8%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)75.4%62.2%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)62.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)6.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured47.9%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
VPCTNot measured40.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Leader
AIME42.1%11.9%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured74.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.5%90.4%GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
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 (2024-11-20) measured
MATH level 5Not measured49.8%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Leader
MMLU Pro79.1%72.6%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
LegalBench (Vals AI)82.0%82.2%GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured59.7%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)57.6%45.9%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%74.5%GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
MortgageTax (Vals AI)57.6%57.4%Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
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%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
GeoBenchNot measured71.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 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 (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)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
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured81.8%Only GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 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 (2024-11-20)
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGPT-4o (2024-11-20)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 (2024-11-20)$0.0075Fits 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 (2024-11-20)$0.155Fits 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 (2024-11-20)$0.600Exceeds 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 (2024-11-20)
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 22, 2025November 20, 2024
Context window1.05M128K
Input $/Mtok$0.10$2.50
Output $/Mtok$0.40$10.00
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 (2024-11-20) 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 25.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 128K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or GPT-4o (2024-11-20)?

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-4o (2024-11-20) costs $2.50 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or GPT-4o (2024-11-20)?

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

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs GPT-4o (2024-11-20) comparison based on?

11 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 (2024-11-20)'s on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next