Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs GPT-5 Image
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 6.7x less per output token than GPT-5 Image ($1.50 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $1.50
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $10.00
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GPT-5 Image: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for output tokens 6.7x cheaper ($1.50 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 400K tokens).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has results on SciCode, Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and WeirdML; GPT-5 Image on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos. 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
Image generation
Design Arena: images
No call
Only GPT-5 Image has a Design Arena: images result, 1191.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 400K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $0.0010, GPT-5 Image $0.015 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite not benchmarked, GPT-5 Image 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
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 against GPT-5 Image $10.00 per million output tokens, 6.7x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-5 Image 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.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Image | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 43.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 24.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| WeirdML | 52.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Image | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.3 | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Image | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 31.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | 37.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Image | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 17.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 81.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Image | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 80.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 27.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Image | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 77.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 74.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| DTBench | 76.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| LMCA | 35.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 42 boards here | |||
Image generationDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Image | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: images | Not measured | 1191 | Only GPT-5 Image measured |
| Design Arena: graphic design | Not measured | 1172 | Only GPT-5 Image measured |
| Design Arena: logos | Not measured | 1202 | Only GPT-5 Image measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Gemini 3.1 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.
| Specification | Google Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | OpenAI GPT-5 Image |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | May 7, 2026 | October 14, 2025 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 400K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $10.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.50 | $10.00 |
| 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 Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better than GPT-5 Image for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for output tokens 6.7x cheaper ($1.50 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 400K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GPT-5 Image?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5 Image costs $10.00 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GPT-5 Image?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.
Has any benchmark tested both Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Image?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has results on SciCode, Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and WeirdML; GPT-5 Image on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.