Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs GPT-5 Nano

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview leads GPT-5 Nano on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 15.6 to 13.0, and GPT-5 Nano costs 3.8x less per output token ($0.40 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 53 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGoogle
Coding
22.7
Overall
36.6
Output $/M
$1.50
48
GPT-5 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
35.6
Output $/M
$0.40
5
vs boards won of 53 shared

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview or GPT-5 Nano: which to pick

Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview has a coding score, 22.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-5 Nano has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-5 Nano for output tokens 3.8x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.50 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.109 against $0.18).

Shared results
53
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview only
26
GPT-5 Nano only
34
Like-for-like categories
7 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 3.1 Flash Lite Preview 22.7 from 3 benchmarks, GPT-5 Nano not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 17.6 points apart on average over 23 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LegalBench (Vals AI): Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview 83.8% against GPT-5 Nano 50.1%, 33.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview $1.50 against GPT-5 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 3.8x apart.
Context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-5 Nano 400K.

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 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewBarsGPT-5 NanoTies
Coding30
Intelligence10
Reasoning70
Math30
Knowledge100
Web design24
General221
All shared boards485
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured34.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena WebDev1257Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
AA Coding Index34.7Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)80.1%70.2%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)62.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Code migration (Vals AI)4.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)34.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured17.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured21.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
WeirdMLNot measured38.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ALE-Bench797.7Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LMArena Text: coding14001351Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: software and IT14131345Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena WebDev: React1245Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1276Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1336Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index15.613.0Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured139.2Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)30.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)3.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)3.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)8.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured36.5%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured51.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
GPQA Diamond81.1%63.4%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)82.5%70.9%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured67.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured9.5%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured69.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ARC-AGINot measured20.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured2.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured22.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
VPCTNot measured37.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14071328Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: expert13981321Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14031338Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision: diagrams12421141Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision: homework12711157Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured62.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
AIME83.3%81.2%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured93.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured89.3%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
AA Math IndexNot measured83.7Only GPT-5 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured81.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured20.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured2.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ProofBenchNot measured12.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MATH level 5Not measured95.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math14281317Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: mathematical work14171326Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index100
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
MMLU Pro86.2%76.1%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.8%50.1%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
CaseLaw (Vals AI)55.0%52.6%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
CorpFin (Vals AI)59.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.8%67.4%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.0%53.6%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured93.3%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)47.6%30.4%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured11.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science14251318Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14281335Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: legal and government14181298Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: business and finance13891311Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
FACTS Benchmark Suite51.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index24
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites10821101GPT-5 Nano
Design Arena: UI components10691064Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Design Arena: game dev10291044GPT-5 Nano
Design Arena: data viz10451056GPT-5 Nano
Design Arena: 3D1047965Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Design Arena: all code categories10721084GPT-5 Nano
Design Arena: SVG1052Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1167Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index221
General benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)49.5%30.4%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
MedScribe (Vals AI)63.9%72.9%GPT-5 Nano
Vals Multimodal Index41.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
IFBenchNot measured67.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured45.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
DTBenchNot measured62.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMCANot measured7.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured44.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text14161320Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: instruction following13771306Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: creative writing14011249Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision12401159Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: English14141321Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: non-English14101313Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: Chinese14601356Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: German14301327Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: Japanese14131227Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: Korean13921269Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: French1424Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LMArena Text: Spanish14211360Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: Russian14201296Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: Polish14431314Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: multi-turn14171311Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: longer queries13941312Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: writing and language14081283Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13861268Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision: English12321170Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision: Chinese12781176Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision: reading text12461152Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision: humor12661110Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
LMArena Vision: captioning1259Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1308Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1248Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview 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 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGPT-5 NanoLeader
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 3.1 Flash Lite Preview$0.0010Fits in one request
GPT-5 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview$0.017Fits in one request
GPT-5 Nano$0.0037Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview$0.065Fits in one request
GPT-5 Nano$0.014Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano 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 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and GPT-5 Nano
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewOpenAI GPT-5 Nano
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 3, 2026August 7, 2025
Context window1.05M400K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.05
Output $/Mtok$1.50$0.40
Coding index22.7Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.18$0.109
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview better than GPT-5 Nano for coding?

Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview has a coding score, 22.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-5 Nano has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5 Nano for output tokens 3.8x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.50 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.109 against $0.18).

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview or GPT-5 Nano?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5 Nano costs $0.05 and $0.40. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview costs $0.18 and GPT-5 Nano $0.109.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview or GPT-5 Nano?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs GPT-5 Nano comparison based on?

53 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and GPT-5 Nano's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next