Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs GPT-5.6 Sol
GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.4 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 9.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 38 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 38 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.5 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 math, where GPT-5.6 Sol leads 85.5 to 25.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 0% for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 82.9% for GPT-5.6 Sol.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 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 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 41.8 | 64.4 |
| Released | 2026-07-21 | 2026-07-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 66K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $4 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $20 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 64 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 42.1 (#96), GPT-5.6 Sol: 61.1 (#7)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1440 | 1619 |
| SciCode | 41.3% | 57.1% |
| WeirdML | 39% | 89.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1455 | 1493 |
| ALE-Bench | 765.27 | 2,177 |
| DeepSWE | — | 72.7% |
| FrontierCode | — | 47.5% |
| CursorBench | — | 41.7% |
| FrontierSWE | — | 32.2% |
| MirrorCode | — | 20% |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 28.6 (#82), GPT-5.6 Sol: 50.2 (#7)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| GDP.pdf | 10% | 30.7% |
| APEX-Agents | — | 51.4% |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 27.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 46.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 36.2% |
| BALROG | — | 60% |
| GBAEval | — | 52.6% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1257 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 9,619 |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 27.8 (#95), GPT-5.6 Sol: 74.7 (#6)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 10.3% | 92.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 60.4% | 93.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 53.5% | 97.5% |
| CritPt | 0% | 32.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 22% | 64% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1441 | 1481 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | 58% |
| DTBench | 83.5% | 96% |
| LMCA | 37.6% | 59.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.12 | 161.99 |
| SimpleBench | — | 71.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 67% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 37.1% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 44.8% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 93.1% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.14 |
Math GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.7 (#245), GPT-5.6 Sol: 85.5 (#7)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 26% | 89.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | 82.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 71.1% | 100% |
| ProofBench | 13% | 83% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | 1472 |
| FrontierMath Erdős | — | 0% |
Knowledge GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 50.0 (#66), GPT-5.6 Sol: 64.3 (#16)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | 93.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1430 | 1517 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 69.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.4% |
Multimodal GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 40.3 (#38), GPT-5.6 Sol: 48.9 (#8)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1266 | 1281 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 33.6% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 56.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1483 |
Multilingual GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 53.8 (#59), GPT-5.6 Sol: 55.4 (#32)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1428 | 1450 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1467 | 1523 |
| LMArena French | 1452 | 1475 |
| LMArena German | 1454 | 1476 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1428 | 1475 |
| LMArena Korean | 1406 | 1434 |
| LMArena Russian | 1443 | 1466 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1440 | 1449 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 75.0 (#77), GPT-5.6 Sol: 77.8 (#16)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1480 |
Long Context GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 43.8 (#80), GPT-5.6 Sol: 45.3 (#42)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1435 | 1479 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 64.4 (#55), GPT-5.6 Sol: 73.5 (#12)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1456 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1419 | 1450 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1559 | 1972 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1250 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite better than GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.4 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 9.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Sol lists at $4 and $20.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or GPT-5.6 Sol better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 61.1 versus 42.1 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 3.5 Flash Lite and GPT-5.6 Sol share?
38 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has 38 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.6 Sol has 64.