Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs GPT-5.1-Codex

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.1-Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.8 vs 38.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Google

37.8

Rank #194 Confirmed

GPT-5.1-Codex OpenAI

38.6

Rank #186 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 41.9 to 37.9.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
ProviderGoogleOpenAI
Noometry Index37.838.6
Released2025-02-052025-11-12
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—400K
Max output—128K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.25
Output $ / M tokens—$10
Results tracked326

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.9 (#185), GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—66%
LMArena WebDev—1337
LiveBench Coding47.1%—
LMArena Coding1322—
ALE-Bench—1,245

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
Terminal-Bench—60.4%
METR Time Horizons—70.8%

Reasoning Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 22.0 (#210), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Reasoning50.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1324—
DTBench52.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis65.5%—
ForecastBench57.1—
LiveBench54.3%—

Math Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.1 (#196), GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
ProofBench—9%
Omni-MATH37.4%—
LiveBench Math58.1%—
LMArena Math1309—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 35.0 (#189), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
MMLU-Pro72%—
GPQA (HELM)50%—
LMArena Expert1305—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.2 (#109), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Vision1100—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.0 (#161), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Non-English1323—
LMArena Chinese1339—
LMArena French1347—
LMArena German1306—
LMArena Japanese1301—
LMArena Korean1325—
LMArena Russian1328—
LMArena Spanish1313—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.4 (#163), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Instruction Following78.3%—
IFEval82.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following1305—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#160), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Longer Query1320—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.7 (#177), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text1330—
LMArena Creative Writing1319—
WildBench79%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1307—
LiveBench Language34.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than GPT-5.1-Codex?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.1-Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.8 vs 38.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or GPT-5.1-Codex better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.1-Codex share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.1-Codex has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper