# Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs GPT-5 Nano

> Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-3-1-flash-lite-vs-gpt-5-nano
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 29

## Summary

- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite scores higher in 9 categories and GPT-5 Nano in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads 60.9 to 39.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 35% for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and 7.9% for GPT-5 Nano.
- GPT-5 Nano is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $1.50 for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite.
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 33.5 |
| Rank | 144 | 241 |
| Context | 1.05M | 400K |
| Input $/M | $0.25 | $0.05 |
| Output $/M | $1.50 | $0.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 37.8 (#188)
- GPT-5 Nano: 33.6 (#254)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 52.2% | 38.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1400 | 1351 |
| ALE-Bench | 797.73 | 718.67 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 34.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1256 | — |
| SciCode | 41.9% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 30.2 (#79)
- GPT-5 Nano: 25.8 (#106)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 21.8% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 51.5% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 37.3% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 22.9 (#186)
- GPT-5 Nano: 16.3 (#306)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67.2% | 62.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | 25% | 27% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1328 |
| DTBench | 76.8% | 62.7% |
| LMCA | 35% | 7.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.47 | 139.38 |
| ForecastBench | 54.4 | 59.1 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 2.6% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 8.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 20.7% |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 3% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 63.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |

## Math

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 40.7 (#90)
- GPT-5 Nano: 29.4 (#241)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 27.7% | 20% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 80% | 81.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1428 | 1317 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 2.4% |
| ProofBench | — | 12% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 54.6% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 95.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 8.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 41.9 (#104)
- GPT-5 Nano: 35.9 (#178)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 81.8% | 69.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.2% | 10.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1398 | 1321 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 11.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 77.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 67.9% |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 39.4 (#60)
- GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#108)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1240 | 1159 |
| VPCT | — | 37.2% |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 52.3 (#86)
- GPT-5 Nano: 45.3 (#172)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1411 | 1313 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1461 | 1356 |
| LMArena German | 1429 | 1327 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1413 | 1226 |
| LMArena Korean | 1392 | 1269 |
| LMArena Russian | 1420 | 1296 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | 1360 |
| LMArena French | 1424 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 72.7 (#131)
- GPT-5 Nano: 75.0 (#79)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1377 | 1306 |
| IFEval | — | 93.2% |

## Long Context

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 42.5 (#122)
- GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#281)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1394 | 1312 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 44.4% |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 60.9 (#94)
- GPT-5 Nano: 39.1 (#249)

| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1416 | 1320 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1249 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1417 | 1311 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 705 |
| WildBench | — | 80.6% |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better than GPT-5 Nano?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GPT-5 Nano?

GPT-5 Nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite lists at $0.25 and $1.50.

### Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GPT-5 Nano better for coding?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 33.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GPT-5 Nano share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has 38 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5 Nano has 49.