+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT-4.1 nano
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads with 16.2% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite offers 33.8K more tokens in context window than GPT-4.1 nano. Both models have similar pricing. Overall, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite was created as the most efficient option in the Gemini 2.5 family, designed to provide cutting-edge capabilities with minimal computational overhead. Built for applications where cost and latency are primary concerns, it extends advanced multimodal understanding to resource-conscious deployments.
+
+
+
+
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
GPT-4.1 nano
OpenAI
2025-04-14
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
2025-06-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.40
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.40
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Average Score:54.7%(+16.2%)
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Average Score:38.5%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
GPT-4.1 nano
2024-05-31
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
2025-01-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
1 providers
Throughput: 5.69 tok/s
Latency: 0.44ms
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Avg Score:54.7%(+16.2%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Avg Score:38.5%
Providers:1