Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Granite 4.0 Micro
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 21× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 4 categories and Granite 4.0 Micro in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 39.9 to 12.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 2.8% for Granite 4.0 Micro.
- Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper at $0.017 / $0.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Granite 4.0 Micro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2025-10-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 66K | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.017 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.11 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 8 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning Granite 4.0 Micro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), Granite 4.0 Micro: 19.2 (#265)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | — |
| DTBench | 76.5% | — |
| LMCA | 27.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), Granite 4.0 Micro: 12.0 (#307)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | 2.8% |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | 20.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1415 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), Granite 4.0 Micro: 9.9 (#304)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | 39.5% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | 30.7% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | — |
| LMArena French | 1433 | — |
| LMArena German | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), Granite 4.0 Micro: 69.9 (#169)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 89.8% | 84.9% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), Granite 4.0 Micro: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), Granite 4.0 Micro: 46.7 (#216)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Granite 4.0 Micro |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | 81.7% | 67% |
| LMArena Text | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Granite 4.0 Micro?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 21× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Granite 4.0 Micro?
Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper. It lists at $0.017 per million input tokens and $0.11 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Granite 4.0 Micro share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.0 Micro has 8.