Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Grok Build 0.1
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 1 category and Grok Build 0.1 in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok Build 0.1 leads 32.2 to 18.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 1.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 9.1% for Grok Build 0.1.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $2 for Grok Build 0.1.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 256K.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 36.4 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2026-04-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 256K |
| Max output | 66K | 256K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $1 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $2 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok Build 0.1 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), Grok Build 0.1: 43.1 (#91)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| SciCode | — | 50.2% |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), Grok Build 0.1: 22.7 (#129)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| GBAEval | — | 2.4% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning Grok Build 0.1 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), Grok Build 0.1: 32.2 (#77)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.1% | 9.1% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | — |
| DTBench | 76.5% | — |
| LMCA | 27.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), Grok Build 0.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1415 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), Grok Build 0.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), Grok Build 0.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), Grok Build 0.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), Grok Build 0.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), Grok Build 0.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), Grok Build 0.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Grok Build 0.1?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Grok Build 0.1?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Grok Build 0.1 lists at $1 and $2.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or Grok Build 0.1 better for coding?
Grok Build 0.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.1 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Grok Build 0.1 share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Grok Build 0.1 has 3.