Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Grok 4.5
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.5 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.1 to 22.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 40.5% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 83.5% for Grok 4.5.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 500K.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 37.0 | 55.0 |
| Released | 2025-06-17 | 2026-07-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 500K |
| Max output | 66K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 33 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 35.2% | 46.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1373 | 1474 |
| ALE-Bench | 325.9 | 1,309 |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.8% |
| FrontierCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1553 |
| SciCode | — | 54.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.2% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 36.9% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 47.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 23.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 65.4% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1213 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,887 |
Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | 83.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1377 | 1462 |
| DTBench | 62.8% | 96.5% |
| LMCA | 18.1% | 45.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.94 | 153.92 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 52.6% |
| SimpleBench | — | 70% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.2% |
| CritPt | — | 15.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 36% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 74.4% |
Math Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1373 | 1459 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 24.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 97.8% |
| ProofBench | — | 31% |
| Omni-MATH | 48% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1373 | 1466 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 93.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 48.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | 53.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.9% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1198 | 1288 |
| VPCT | 30% | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 27.3% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 22.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |
Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1369 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1404 | 1496 |
| LMArena French | 1388 | 1456 |
| LMArena German | 1389 | 1446 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1359 | 1428 |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | 1404 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1448 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | 1450 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | 1446 |
| IFEval | 81% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1463 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 47.2% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1379 | 1448 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1367 | 1442 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1366 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1579 |
| WildBench | 81.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Grok 4.5?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Grok 4.5 better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 500K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Grok 4.5 share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.5 has 52.