Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite scores higher in 4 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 5 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 43.9 to 27.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 60.4% for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 89.6% for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 46.2 |
| Released | 2026-07-21 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 39 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 42.4 (#104), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1453 | 1457 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1440 | — |
| SciCode | 41.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 39% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 765.27 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.7 (#107), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 29.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 10% | — |
| LMArena Search | — | 1204 |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 27.8 (#114), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 60.4% | 89.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1441 | 1448 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 10.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 53.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 22% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | — |
| DTBench | 83.5% | — |
| LMCA | 37.6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.13 | — |
Math Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.9 (#264), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1433 | 1442 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 26% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 71.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 13% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 50.1 (#72), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1435 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | — |
Multimodal Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 41.1 (#40), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1268 | 1259 |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 53.5 (#63), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1427 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1469 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1451 | 1466 |
| LMArena German | 1454 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1427 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1443 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1442 | 1447 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 74.8 (#85), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1420 |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 43.9 (#84), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1435 | 1431 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 64.2 (#57), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1435 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1420 | 1436 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1452 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1559 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (42.4 vs 43.0); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has 39 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.