Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs MAI-Thinking-1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No comparison
N/A
1 category wins1 category wins

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and MAI-Thinking-1 share 3 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 10 to MAI-Thinking-1.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
3
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
18
MAI-Thinking-1 only
10
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; MAI-Thinking-1 is the better fit if coding is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 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 3.5 Flash-Lite and MAI-Thinking-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 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for MAI-Thinking-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 3.5 Flash-Lite and MAI-Thinking-1
CategoryGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔMAI-Thinking-1
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4Margin 17.4MAI-Thinking-146.0
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2Margin 11.3MAI-Thinking-165.5
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2MarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-1Not measured
KnowledgeGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-172.5
MathGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-189.7
Inst. FollowingGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapMAI-Thinking-185.0

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteB · MAI-Thinking-1
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 54%B 46%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 8
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%; MAI-Thinking-1 scored 46%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.
  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 54.2%B 52.8%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 1.4
    SWE-bench Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54.2%; MAI-Thinking-1 scored 52.8%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 outputMAI-Thinking-1Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableMAI-Thinking-1Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableMAI-Thinking-1Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1MMAI-Thinking-1256KGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 54%46%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 74%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1140Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 26.8%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 32.0%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 634Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 16.5%Not comparable
CodingMAI-Thinking-1 wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 54.0%46.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
SWE-bench ProSource 54.2%52.8%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA Coding IndexSource 49.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 40.9%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.5%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Result
MRCRv2Source 72.2%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 62.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Graphwalks BFS 128KSource 90%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 36.5%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 83.8%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 17.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 6.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 30.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 33.5%Not comparable
GPQASource 84.2%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 84.2%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 85%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 31%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Result
AIME 2025Source 97%Not comparable
AIME26Source 94.5%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 84.9%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 79.0%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMAI-Thinking-1Result
IFBenchSource 85%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or MAI-Thinking-1?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and MAI-Thinking-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 MAI-Thinking-1?

MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 65.5 versus 54.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or MAI-Thinking-1?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 46. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 21, 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.