Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs GPT-5.1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

48.09/100
Margin
5.6pts
winning →
OpenAI
53.65/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 2.5 Flash #130 (Supported); GPT-5.1 #94 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.1 share 15 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Gemini 2.5 Flash; 6 to GPT-5.1.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
15
Gemini 2.5 Flash only
0
GPT-5.1 only
6
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GPT-5.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 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

GPT-5.1 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 53.65 to 48.09. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GPT-5.1's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 26.4 against 4.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 4.844% to 31.034%.

GPT-5.1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash. That is roughly 4.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.1 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 2.5 Flash is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemini 2.5 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for GPT-5.1.

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 scores and score margins for Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.1
CategoryGemini 2.5 FlashΔGPT-5.1
MathGemini 2.5 Flash4.7Margin 21.7GPT-5.126.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemini 2.5 FlashB · GPT-5.1
  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 4.844%B 31.034%
    Winner: GPT-5.1Δ 26.2
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 2.5 Flash scored 4.844%; GPT-5.1 scored 31.034%. GPT-5.1 wins this benchmark.
  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 4.167%B 12.500%
    Winner: GPT-5.1Δ 8.3
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Gemini 2.5 Flash scored 4.167%; GPT-5.1 scored 12.500%. GPT-5.1 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 2.5 Flash$0.3 input / $2.5 outputGPT-5.1$1.25 input / $10 outputGemini 2.5 Flash has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 2.5 Flash221 tok/sGPT-5.1111 tok/sGemini 2.5 Flash has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 2.5 Flash0.50 sGPT-5.157.47 sGemini 2.5 Flash reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 2.5 Flash1MGPT-5.1200KGemini 2.5 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 14.9%81.9%GPT-5.1 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.0%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 41.24%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 24.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 987Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Result
AA-SciCodeSource 29.1%43.3%GPT-5.1 leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 24.61%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 49.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Result
AA-LCRSource 45.9%75.0%GPT-5.1 leads
CritPtSource 1.4%4.9%GPT-5.1 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 14.1%36.9%GPT-5.1 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 68.3%87.3%GPT-5.1 leads
AA-HLESource 5.1%26.5%GPT-5.1 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -42.0%5.6%GPT-5.1 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 26.5%37.6%GPT-5.1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 93.3%51.3%GPT-5.1 leads
MathGPT-5.1 wins
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 4.844%31.034%GPT-5.1 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%12.500%GPT-5.1 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 65.5%75.5%GPT-5.1 leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 11481220GPT-5.1 leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.1Result
AA-IFBenchSource 39.0%72.9%GPT-5.1 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.1?

GPT-5.1 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 53.65 to 48.09. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 4.844% and 31.034%.

Which is better for math, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.1?

GPT-5.1 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 26.4 versus 4.7. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 20, 2026

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.