Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs GPT-4o
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 7 categories and GPT-4o in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads 34.1 to 10.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Language: 34.3% for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and 47.6% for GPT-4o.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 37.8 | 28.6 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2024-05-13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $10 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 72 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.9 (#185), GPT-4o: 24.8 (#328)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 47.1% | 51.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1297 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 31% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 21.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 45.3% |
| GSO | — | 0% |
| WeirdML | — | 25.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 51.1% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 61.1% |
| CadEval | — | 26% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 72.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, GPT-4o: 21.0 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| GDPval | — | 9.9% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 8.6% |
| Cybench | — | 12.5% |
| BALROG | — | 32.3% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1006 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 40.8% |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 22.0 (#210), GPT-4o: 9.4 (#343)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.1% | 55.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1324 | 1281 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 64.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | 60.9% |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | 57.7 |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | 55.3% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | — | 17.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 4.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 13% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.8% |
| LMCA | — | 16.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.97 |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.1 (#196), GPT-4o: 10.6 (#312)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 37.4% | 29.3% |
| LiveBench Math | 58.1% | 49.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1309 | 1285 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 0.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 53.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0.3% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 35.0 (#189), GPT-4o: 28.8 (#242)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 72% | 71.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50% | 52% |
| LMArena Expert | 1305 | 1250 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 49.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 2.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 26% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.6% |
| MMLU | — | 88.1% |
Multimodal GPT-4o leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.2 (#109), GPT-4o: 34.5 (#91)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1100 | 1137 |
| Video-MME | — | 71.9% |
| GeoBench | — | 71% |
| VPCT | — | 40% |
| ScienceQA | — | 88.5% |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.0 (#161), GPT-4o: 43.2 (#186)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1323 | 1283 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1339 | 1277 |
| LMArena French | 1347 | 1304 |
| LMArena German | 1306 | 1282 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1301 | 1257 |
| LMArena Korean | 1325 | 1234 |
| LMArena Russian | 1328 | 1286 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1313 | 1292 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.4 (#163), GPT-4o: 66.6 (#207)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 78.3% | 68.6% |
| IFEval | 82.4% | 81.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | 1278 |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#160), GPT-4o: 39.4 (#179)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1320 | 1289 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.7 (#177), GPT-4o: 52.6 (#166)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1330 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1292 |
| WildBench | 79% | 82.8% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1307 | 1302 |
| LiveBench Language | 34.3% | 47.6% |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 81.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than GPT-4o?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or GPT-4o better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.9 versus 24.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-4o share?
32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4o has 72.