Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) vs Ring-2.6-1T

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) has enough public results to be ranked (#246); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) Google

33.2

Rank #246 Confirmed

Ring-2.6-1T Ant Group (inclusionAI)

36.9

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where Ring-2.6-1T leads 40.7 to 34.4.
  • Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
ProviderGoogleAnt Group (inclusionAI)
Noometry Index33.236.9
Released2024-05-142026-05-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked423

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 34.4 (#236), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.7

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
SciCode—42.4%
WeirdML24.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct43.5%—
LMArena Coding1261—
BigCodeBench Complete55.1%—
ALE-Bench—432.57
HumanEval+75.6%—
MBPP+67.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 26.6 (#102), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
BALROG14.6%—

Reasoning Ring-2.6-1T leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 21.7 (#215), Ring-2.6-1T: 26.1

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
CritPt—3.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts1257—
DTBench53.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index129.36—
ForecastBench53.9—
PIQA87.5%—

Math Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 22.1 (#281), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202516.3%—
Omni-MATH30.4%—
LMArena Math1269—
MATH Level 561.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)0%—
GSM8K82.4%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 26.2 (#260), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
GPQA Diamond47.3%—
MMLU-Pro67.8%—
GPQA (HELM)43.7%—
LMArena Expert1233—
BoolQ85.8%—
MMLU77.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 36.0 (#81), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Vision1141—
Video-MME70.3%—
GeoBench76%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 42.9 (#189), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Non-English1278—
LMArena Chinese1295—
LMArena French1258—
LMArena German1262—
LMArena Japanese1252—
LMArena Korean1221—
LMArena Russian1288—
LMArena Spanish1243—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 66.8 (#205), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
IFEval83.1%—
LMArena Instruction Following1258—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 39.0 (#187), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Longer Query1284—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024): 48.7 (#196), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024)Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Text1287—
LMArena Creative Writing1285—
WildBench79.2%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1253—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) better than Ring-2.6-1T?

Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) has enough public results to be ranked (#246); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?

Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.7 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) and Ring-2.6-1T share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.5 Flash (May 2024) has 42 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper