Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) vs GPT-5.2 Pro
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) costs 56.0x less per output token than GPT-5.2 Pro ($3.00 vs $168.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $3.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $168.00
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) or GPT-5.2 Pro: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) for output tokens 56.0x cheaper ($3.00 vs $168.00 per million).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) has results on LMArena Image Edit; GPT-5.2 Pro on Epoch Capabilities Index, ARC-AGI and ARC-AGI-2. Compare them on price and context instead.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.2 Pro
GPT-5.2 Pro takes 400K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) $0.0020, GPT-5.2 Pro $0.105 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) not benchmarked, GPT-5.2 Pro not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) $3.00 against GPT-5.2 Pro $168.00 per million output tokens, 56.0x apart.
- Context window
- Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) takes 131K tokens, GPT-5.2 Pro 400K.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 156.3 | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI | Not measured | 90.5% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 54.2% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| SimpleBench | Not measured | 57.4% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 60.0% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 74.0% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | Not measured | 46.0% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Image generationDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Image Edit | 1387 | Not measured | Only Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 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
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) 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.
| Specification | Google Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | OpenAI GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | June 18, 2026 | December 10, 2025 |
| Context window | 131K | 400K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.50 | $21.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $3.00 | $168.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) better than GPT-5.2 Pro for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) for output tokens 56.0x cheaper ($3.00 vs $168.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) or GPT-5.2 Pro?
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) costs $0.50 per million input tokens and $3.00 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro costs $21.00 and $168.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) or GPT-5.2 Pro?
GPT-5.2 Pro, with 400K tokens against 131K.
Has any benchmark tested both Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) and GPT-5.2 Pro?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) has results on LMArena Image Edit; GPT-5.2 Pro on Epoch Capabilities Index, ARC-AGI and ARC-AGI-2. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.