Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs GPT-5 Nano

GPT-5 Nano costs 3.8x less per output token than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite ($0.40 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 14 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
12
GPT-5 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
35.6
Output $/M
$0.40
2
vs boards won of 14 shared

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GPT-5 Nano: 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 a larger context window (1.05M against 400K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom or OTIS Mock AIME, where it leads.

Shared results
14
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite only
2
GPT-5 Nano only
73
Like-for-like categories
6 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 not benchmarked, GPT-5 Nano not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 20.1 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 74.3% against GPT-5 Nano 45.0%, 29.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 against GPT-5 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 3.8x apart.
Context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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 LiteBarsGPT-5 NanoTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Agentic work01
Reasoning40
Math11
General40
All shared boards122
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured34.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured70.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
SciCode43.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)24.2%17.4%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Terminal-BenchNot measured21.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
WeirdML52.2%38.1%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1351Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1345Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured13.0Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Epoch Capabilities Index144.3139.2Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom31.3%36.5%GPT-5 Nano
DeepResearch Bench37.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured51.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured63.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured70.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)82.2%67.6%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.2%9.5%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)81.8%69.4%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
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 promptsNot measured1328Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1321Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1338Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1141Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1157Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark67.2%62.2%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Math benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
AIMENot measured81.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
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 AIME80.0%81.1%GPT-5 Nano
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 327.7%20.0%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
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: mathNot measured1317Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1326Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
MMLU ProNot measured76.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured50.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured52.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured67.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured53.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured93.3%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured30.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured11.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1318Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1335Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1298Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1311Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1101Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1064Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1044Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1056Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured965Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1084Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
General benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-5 NanoLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured30.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured72.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
IFBench77.2%67.6%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)74.3%45.0%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
DTBench76.8%62.7%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMCA35.0%7.9%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured44.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena TextNot measured1320Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1306Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1249Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1159Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1321Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1313Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1356Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1327Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1227Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1269Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1360Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1296Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1314Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1311Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1312Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1283Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1268Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1170Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1176Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1152Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1110Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 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 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGPT-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$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$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$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 and GPT-5 Nano
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteOpenAI GPT-5 Nano
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMay 7, 2026August 7, 2025
Context window1.05M400K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.05
Output $/Mtok$1.50$0.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.109
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

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

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 400K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom or OTIS Mock AIME, where it leads.

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

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5 Nano costs $0.05 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5 Nano only.

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

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

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

14 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 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