Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT-5.6 Sol

GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.0 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 46× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 25 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Google

37.0

Rank #211 Confirmed

GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI

65.0

Rank #7 Confirmed

Summary

They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.6 Sol in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.6 Sol leads 74.8 to 22.2.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 35.2% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 89.4% for GPT-5.6 Sol.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for GPT-5.6 Sol.
GPT-5.6 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1.05M.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.6 Sol specifications
	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
Provider	Google	OpenAI
Noometry Index	37.0	65.0
Released	2025-06-17	2026-07-09
Weights	Proprietary	Proprietary
Context window	1.05M	1.05M
Max output	66K	128K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.10	$4
Output $ / M tokens	$0.40	$20
Results tracked	33	65

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), GPT-5.6 Sol: 65.1 (#7)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
WeirdML	35.2%	89.4%
LMArena Coding	1373	1498
ALE-Bench	325.9	2,177
DeepSWE	—	72.7%
FrontierCode	—	47.5%
CursorBench	—	41.7%
LMArena WebDev	—	1618
FrontierSWE	—	32.2%
SciCode	—	57.1%
GSO	—	76.5%
MirrorCode	—	20%

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), GPT-5.6 Sol: 50.3 (#7)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
APEX-Agents	—	51.4%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	36.9%	—
OSWorld 2.0	—	27.3%
τ²-bench Banking	—	46.9%
PostTrainBench	—	36.2%
BALROG	—	60%
GBAEval	—	52.6%
GDP.pdf	—	30.7%
LMArena Search	—	1257
Vending-Bench 2	—	9,619

Reasoning GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), GPT-5.6 Sol: 74.8 (#8)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
Kagi LLM Benchmark	40.5%	67%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1377	1484
DTBench	62.8%	96%
LMCA	18.1%	59.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index	133.94	161.66
ARC-AGI-2	—	92.5%
SimpleBench	—	71.7%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	93.8%
ARC-AGI-1	—	97.5%
CritPt	—	32.3%
Chess Puzzles	—	64%
EnigmaEval	—	37.1%
EBR-Bench	—	44.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	58%
Surface Evolver Bench	—	93.1%
Bench to the Future 3	—	0.14

Math GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), GPT-5.6 Sol: 85.6 (#9)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Math	1373	1474
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	89.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4	—	82.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	100%
ProofBench	—	83%
Omni-MATH	48%	—
FrontierMath Erdős	—	0%

Knowledge GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), GPT-5.6 Sol: 64.3 (#18)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
Vectara Hallucination Rate	3.3%	12.4%
LMArena Expert	1373	1516
GPQA Diamond	—	93.5%
SimpleQA Verified	—	69.7%
MMLU-Pro	53.7%	—
GPQA (HELM)	30.9%	—

Multimodal GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), GPT-5.6 Sol: 48.6 (#9)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Vision	1198	1281
VPCT	30%	—
Blueprint-Bench 2	—	33.6%
Furniture Assembly	—	56.7%
LMArena Document	—	1483

Multilingual GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), GPT-5.6 Sol: 55.3 (#32)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Non-English	1369	1452
LMArena Chinese	1404	1527
LMArena French	1388	1477
LMArena German	1389	1476
LMArena Japanese	1359	1471
LMArena Korean	1360	1442
LMArena Russian	1373	1468
LMArena Spanish	1396	1441

Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), GPT-5.6 Sol: 77.7 (#16)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Instruction Following	1367	1482
IFEval	81%	—

Long Context GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), GPT-5.6 Sol: 45.4 (#42)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Longer Query	1373	1480
Fiction.LiveBench	47.2%	—

Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Sol leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), GPT-5.6 Sol: 73.3 (#12)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text	1379	1457
LMArena Creative Writing	1367	1448
LMArena Multi-Turn	1366	1460
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1972
WildBench	81.8%	—
EQ-Bench 4	—	1250

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than GPT-5.6 Sol?

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or GPT-5.6 Sol?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Sol lists at $4 and $20.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or GPT-5.6 Sol better for coding?

GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 65.1 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.6 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.6 Sol share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.6 Sol has 65.