Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Grok Code Fast 1
Head-to-head evidence from 9 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored); Grok Code Fast 1 #180 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Grok Code Fast 1 share 9 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 12 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 3 to Grok Code Fast 1.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 9
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 12
- Grok Code Fast 1 only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite makes more sense if you need the larger 1M context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile; Grok Code Fast 1 is the better fit if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 9 shared benchmark results across 3 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 3.5 Flash-Lite and Grok Code Fast 1 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.20 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok Code Fast 1. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok Code Fast 1 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 3.5 Flash-Lite gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Grok Code Fast 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 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Δ | Grok Code Fast 1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 | Margin→ 16.6 | Grok Code Fast 170.8 |
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 | MarginNo overlap | Grok Code Fast 1Not measured |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 | MarginNo overlap | Grok Code Fast 1Not measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Grok Code Fast 1 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | Grok Code Fast 1$0.2 input / $1.5 output | Grok Code Fast 1 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Grok Code Fast 1172 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Grok Code Fast 12.81 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Grok Code Fast 1256K | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1140 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 26.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 634 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 16.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 75.7% | Not comparable |
CodingGrok Code Fast 1 wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.5% | 21.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 83.8% | 72.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-HLESource | 17.5% | 7.5% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.9% | -36.0% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 30.3% | 23.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 33.5% | 78.5% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 79.0% | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 41.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Grok Code Fast 1?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Grok Code Fast 1 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Grok Code Fast 1?
Grok Code Fast 1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.8 versus 54.2. Inside this category, AA-SciCode 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.