Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs GPT-4.1 nano

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
42.06/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.6 Flash unranked (Not scored); GPT-4.1 nano #161 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.6 Flash and GPT-4.1 nano share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to Gemini 3.6 Flash; 7 to GPT-4.1 nano.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
14
Gemini 3.6 Flash only
5
GPT-4.1 nano only
7
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Gemini 3.6 Flash and GPT-4.1 nano is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is priced at $1.50 input / $7.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 nano.

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 3.6 Flash and GPT-4.1 nano
CategoryGemini 3.6 FlashΔGPT-4.1 nano
AgenticGemini 3.6 Flash83.0MarginNo overlapGPT-4.1 nanoNot measured
KnowledgeGemini 3.6 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-4.1 nano50.3
MathGemini 3.6 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-4.1 nano1.0
Inst. FollowingGemini 3.6 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-4.1 nano83.2

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.6 Flash$1.5 input / $7.5 outputGPT-4.1 nano$0.1 input / $0.4 outputGPT-4.1 nano has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.6 FlashNot availableGPT-4.1 nano181 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.6 FlashNot availableGPT-4.1 nano0.63 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.6 Flash1MGPT-4.1 nano1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoResult
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 83%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 142141Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 38.7%1.2%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
GDPval-AASource 46.1%0.0%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA BriefcaseSource 961—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 24.5%—Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source 77.5%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource —17.3%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoResult
deepSweSource 49%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 69.2%11.1%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-SciCodeSource 52.7%25.9%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoResult
AA-LCRSource 69.7%17.0%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
CritPtSource 10.6%0.0%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 50.1%9.6%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.8%51.2%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-HLESource 38.3%3.9%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 23.5%-56.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 50.2%13.3%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 53.5%80.4%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
MMLUSource —80.1%Not comparable
GPQASource —50.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source —1.034%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 83.2%40.1%Gemini 3.6 Flash leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1003Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4.1 nanoResult
IFEvalSource —83.2%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource —32.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Gemini 3.6 Flash and GPT-4.1 nano on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Gemini 3.6 Flash and GPT-4.1 nano today?

Gemini 3.6 Flash: $1.50 input / $7.50 output per 1M tokens GPT-4.1 nano: $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Google Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
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.