Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs GPT-4.1 nano
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 2.5 Flash #130 (Supported); GPT-4.1 nano #161 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-4.1 nano share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Gemini 2.5 Flash; 7 to GPT-4.1 nano.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Gemini 2.5 Flash only
- 1
- GPT-4.1 nano only
- 7
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 nano only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Gemini 2.5 Flash is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 48.09 to 42.06. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 2.5 Flash's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 4.7 against 1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 4.844% to 1.034%.
Gemini 2.5 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 nano. That is roughly 6.3x on output cost alone.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Δ | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemini 2.5 Flash4.7 | Margin← 3.7 | GPT-4.1 nano1.0 |
| Knowledge | Gemini 2.5 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-4.1 nano50.3 |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 2.5 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-4.1 nano83.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 4.844%B 1.034%Winner: Gemini 2.5 FlashΔ 3.8FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 2.5 Flash scored 4.844%; GPT-4.1 nano scored 1.034%. Gemini 2.5 Flash wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Flash | GPT-4.1 nano | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.3 input / $2.5 output | GPT-4.1 nano$0.1 input / $0.4 output | GPT-4.1 nano has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 2.5 Flash221 tok/s | GPT-4.1 nano181 tok/s | Gemini 2.5 Flash has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 2.5 Flash0.50 s | GPT-4.1 nano0.63 s | Gemini 2.5 Flash reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 2.5 Flash1M | GPT-4.1 nano1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding2 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | GPT-4.1 nano | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 14.1% | 9.6% | Gemini 2.5 Flash leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 68.3% | 51.2% | Gemini 2.5 Flash leads |
| AA-HLESource | 5.1% | 3.9% | Gemini 2.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -42.0% | -56.4% | Gemini 2.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 26.5% | 13.3% | Gemini 2.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 93.3% | 80.4% | GPT-4.1 nano leads |
| MMLUSource | — | 80.1% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 50.3% | Not comparable |
MathGemini 2.5 Flash wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-4.1 nano?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 48.09 to 42.06. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 4.844% and 1.034%.
Which is better for math, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-4.1 nano?
Gemini 2.5 Flash has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 4.7 versus 1. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.