Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Grok 4.1 Fast
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.1 Fast's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 2 categories and Grok 4.1 Fast in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 43.4 to 22.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 36.9% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 69.6% for Grok 4.1 Fast.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.20 / $0.50 for Grok 4.1 Fast.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 37.0 | 41.4 |
| Released | 2025-06-17 | 2025-06-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 128K |
| Max output | 66K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $0.50 |
| Results tracked | 33 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1373 | 1411 |
| ALE-Bench | 325.9 | 394.93 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1242 |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 36.9% | 69.6% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 13.1% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1171 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 1,107 |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), Grok 4.1 Fast: 43.4 (#49)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1377 | 1407 |
| DTBench | 62.8% | 87.7% |
| SimpleBench | — | 56% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 87.4% |
| LMCA | 18.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.94 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61 |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1373 | 1408 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 60.9% |
| ProofBench | — | 4% |
| Omni-MATH | 48% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.3% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1373 | 1399 |
| MMLU-Pro | 53.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.9% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1198 | 1201 |
| VPCT | 30% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1369 | 1391 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1404 | 1441 |
| LMArena French | 1388 | 1415 |
| LMArena German | 1389 | 1404 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1359 | 1349 |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | 1361 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | 1413 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | 1376 |
| IFEval | 81% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1390 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 47.2% | — |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1379 | 1408 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1367 | 1394 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1366 | 1389 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1327 |
| WildBench | 81.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Grok 4.1 Fast?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.1 Fast's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Grok 4.1 Fast?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.1 Fast lists at $0.20 and $0.50.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Grok 4.1 Fast better for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Grok 4.1 Fast share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.1 Fast has 32.