+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs GPT-4.1 nano
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads with 6.9% higher average benchmark score. GPT-4.1 nano offers 23.6K more tokens in context window than Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite. Both models have similar pricing. Overall, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite was created as an even more efficient variant of Gemini 2.0 Flash, designed for applications where minimal latency and maximum cost-effectiveness are essential. Built to bring next-generation multimodal capabilities to resource-constrained deployments, it optimizes for speed and affordability.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
GPT-4.1 Nano was developed as the smallest and most efficient variant in the GPT-4.1 family, designed for applications requiring minimal latency and resource usage. Built to enable AI capabilities on edge devices and resource-constrained environments, it distills GPT-4.1 capabilities into an ultra-compact form factor.
2 months newer
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
2025-02-05
GPT-4.1 nano
OpenAI
2025-04-14
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Input:$0.07
Output:$0.30($0.13 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.40
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Average Score:59.8%(+6.9%)
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Average Score:52.8%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
GPT-4.1 nano
2024-05-31
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
2024-06-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
1 providers
Throughput: 85 tok/s
Latency: 0.7ms
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Avg Score:59.8%(+6.9%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Avg Score:52.8%
Providers:1