Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5 Nano vs Step 3.5 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 34 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-5 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
13.0
Output $/M
$0.40
1
Step 3.5 FlashStepFun
Coding
No data
Overall
17.0
Output $/M
$0.30
33
vs boards won of 34 shared

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

GPT-5 Nano has the edge where the context window is larger, 400K against 262K tokens, and where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Shared results
34
GPT-5 Nano only
51
Step 3.5 Flash only
1
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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
GPT-5 Nano not benchmarked, Step 3.5 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 57.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GPT-5 Nano 36.5% against Step 3.5 Flash 94.4%, 57.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5 Nano $0.40 against Step 3.5 Flash $0.30 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5 Nano takes 400K tokens, Step 3.5 Flash 262K.

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
CategoryGPT-5 NanoBarsStep 3.5 FlashTies
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge04
General117
All shared boards133
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
SWE-bench Verified34.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)78.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)17.4%32.6%Step 3.5 Flash
Terminal-Bench21.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
WeirdML38.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding13511436Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT13451434Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index13.017.0Step 3.5 Flash
Epoch Capabilities Index139.2Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom36.5%94.4%Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond63.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)70.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)67.6%83.1%Step 3.5 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)9.5%24.5%Step 3.5 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)69.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
ARC-AGI20.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-22.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Chess puzzles22.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzles9.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
VPCT37.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13281411Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: expert13211421Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13381421Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Vision: diagrams1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homework1157Not measuredOnly 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 index02
Math benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AIME81.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)93.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
AA Math Index83.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)83.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME81.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 320.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
ProofBench12.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MATH level 595.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math13171408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work13261421Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro76.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)50.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)52.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)67.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)53.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified11.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science13181415Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13351408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government12981408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance13111394Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1101Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: UI components1067Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: game dev1045Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: data viz1056Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: 3D966Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: all code categories1084Not measuredOnly 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 index117
General benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)72.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
IFBench67.6%66.5%GPT-5 Nano
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)45.0%63.0%Step 3.5 Flash
DTBench62.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMCA7.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text13201403Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following13061385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing12491357Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Vision1159Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English13211417Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: non-English13131385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese13561446Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: German13271405Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese12271353Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Korean12691351Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1421Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Spanish13601419Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Russian12961385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish13141389Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn13111404Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries13121402Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language12831372Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12681360Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Vision: English1170Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1176Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1152Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humor1110Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoStep 3.5 FlashLeader
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

GPT-5 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

Same cost

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5 Nano$0.0037Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0059Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5 Nano$0.014Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.023Fits 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 GPT-5 Nano and Step 3.5 Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5 NanoStepFun Step 3.5 Flash
MakerOpenAIStepFun
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 7, 2025January 29, 2026
Context window400K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.05$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.40$0.30
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved task$0.109Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5 Nano better than Step 3.5 Flash for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GPT-5 Nano has the edge where the context window is larger, 400K against 262K tokens, and where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Nano or Step 3.5 Flash?

GPT-5 Nano costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5 Nano only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5 Nano or Step 3.5 Flash?

GPT-5 Nano, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5 Nano vs Step 3.5 Flash comparison based on?

34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5 Nano's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Step 3.5 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next