Capability
51/100
field median 59.1
#130 of 230 ranked models
Superseded.Google has newer models in this line:Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Released Mar 3, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision reading
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite scores 51 out of 100 and ranks #130 of 230. This profile shows 3 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Coding at #121. API pricing is $0.25 input and $1.5 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.025.
Data as of September 2, 2026 · How the score is built
Strongest published evidence
Coding ranks #121. Particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Validate before choosing
3 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty.
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Price
$0.25input / $1.50 output
input median $1
cached $0.025 · batch + cache $0.013 · blended $0.88
Speed
292tok/s
field median 90 tok/s
First token 5.5 s
Context
1Mtokens
field median 256,000
Maximum output length is tracked separately
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite category percentile values
- AgenticNot eligible
- Coding18th percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- KnowledgeNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- AgenticNot ranked
- Coding#121/148
- ReasoningNot ranked
- KnowledgeNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
What it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Current modelGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite · 51.0 score · $0.88 blended per million tokens
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
How much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic1/1 verified
- Coding1/1 verified
- ReasoningNot measured
- KnowledgeNot measured
- MathNot measured
- MultilingualNot measured
- Multimodal1/1 verified
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- gemini-3.1-flash-liteGoogle Gemini API pricing
- Context window
- 1MGoogle Gemini API pricing
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Superseded
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Published at $0.025 per million cached input tokensGoogle Gemini API pricing
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticWeight 22%1 benchmarkVerified | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 22% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| CodingRank #121 of 148Percentile 18thWeight 20%1 benchmarkVerified | 43.0 | #121 of 148 | 18th | 20% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| KnowledgeWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalRank Not rankedWeight 12%1 benchmarkVerified | 35.2 | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchVibe Code Bench v1.1 | Score0.00% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.7 · 71.00% | Gap71 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Agentic1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | Score38.46% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap34.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Multimodal1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score73.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5% | Gap20.3 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. A successor's displayed score stays at least 0.1 points above its predecessor; raw benchmark rows do not move. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Mar 3, 2026 · you are here
Gemini 3.1 Flash-LiteScore 51.0 · $0.25 / $1.5
Jul 21, 2026
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteScore 65.1 · $0.3 / $2.5
Base entry
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite ranks #130 of 230 on the public leaderboard with a score of 51.01/100. Its source-verified position is #61 of 105.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is a proprietary model with a 1M context window. No explicit reasoning mode is documented in this profile.
3 of 416 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Coding at #121. particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Radar
Full release historyGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite release history
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite released
Google · Model release
Source confirmed
Radar confirmed these at the source. Already tracking Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite? See the free Radar Brief for what changes next.
Frequently asked questions
How does Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite ranks #130 out of 230 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 51.01/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 3 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite good for coding and programming?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite ranks #121 out of 148 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 43/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has source-displayable benchmark coverage for agentic tool use and computer tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has source-displayable benchmark coverage for multimodal and grounded tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Does Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite currently has 3 source-displayable rows across 416 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.
Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite with every tracked model409 comparisons
Last updated September 2, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Watch Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite in the weekly brief
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.