Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs o1
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported); o1 #129 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 2.5 Pro and o1 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to Gemini 2.5 Pro; 2 to o1.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 10
- o1 only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o1 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 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 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 57.25 to 48.1. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 2.5 Pro's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 11.6 against 9.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 83% to 75.7%. o1 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
o1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $60.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Pro. That is roughly 6.0x on output cost alone. o1 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 2.5 Pro 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 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for o1.
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 Pro | Δ | o1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4 | Margin→ 48.3 | o175.7 |
| Math | Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6 | Margin← 2.3 | o19.3 |
| Coding | Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8 | MarginNo overlap | o1Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | o192.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 83%B 75.7%Winner: Gemini 2.5 ProΔ 7.3GPQA: Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 83%; o1 scored 75.7%. Gemini 2.5 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 14.138%B 9.310%Winner: Gemini 2.5 ProΔ 4.8FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 14.138%; o1 scored 9.310%. Gemini 2.5 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | o1 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 output | o1$15 input / $60 output | Gemini 2.5 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/s | o198 tok/s | Gemini 2.5 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 2.5 Pro21.19 s | o132.29 s | Gemini 2.5 Pro reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro1M | o1200K | Gemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledgeo1 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | o1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83% | 75.7% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| HLESource | 18.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.8% | 23.4% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 84.4% | 74.7% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 21.1% | 7.7% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -14.3% | -10.5% | o1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 39.0% | 34.7% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 87.4% | 69.3% | o1 leads |
| MMLUSource | — | 91.8% | Not comparable |
MathGemini 2.5 Pro wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or o1?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 57.25 to 48.1. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 83% and 75.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or o1?
o1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.7 versus 27.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Gemini 2.5 Pro or o1?
Gemini 2.5 Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 11.6 versus 9.3. 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.