Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemini 1.5 Pro vs Gemini 3.5 Flash

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 6 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

35.71/100
Margin
29.0pts
winning →
64.75/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 1.5 Pro #185 (Supported); Gemini 3.5 Flash #33 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 1.5 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash share 6 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Gemini 1.5 Pro; 40 to Gemini 3.5 Flash.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
6
Gemini 1.5 Pro only
0
Gemini 3.5 Flash only
40
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Gemini 1.5 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 6 shared benchmark results across 3 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 3.5 Flash is priced at $1.50 input / $9.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 1.5 Pro. Gemini 1.5 Pro has the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for Gemini 3.5 Flash.

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 1.5 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash
CategoryGemini 1.5 ProΔGemini 3.5 Flash
AgenticGemini 1.5 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash77.2
CodingGemini 1.5 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash53.9
ReasoningGemini 1.5 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash74.7
KnowledgeGemini 1.5 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash47.2
MathGemini 1.5 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash32.9
MultimodalGemini 1.5 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash83.8
Inst. FollowingGemini 1.5 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash76.3

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 1.5 Pro$1.25 input / $5 outputGemini 3.5 Flash$1.5 input / $9 outputGemini 1.5 Pro has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 1.5 ProNot availableGemini 3.5 Flash284.2 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 1.5 ProNot availableGemini 3.5 Flash18.55 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 1.5 Pro2MGemini 3.5 Flash1MGemini 1.5 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 76.2%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 83.6%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 56.5%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 78.4%Not comparable
Finance Agent v2Source 57.9%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1349Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 42.4%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 37.5%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 47.1%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 61.85%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 18.0%Not comparable
AA AutomationBenchSource 42.6%Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 50.1%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 40.9%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashResult
AA Coding IndexSource 23.6%70.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-SciCodeSource 29.5%53.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 76.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 55.1%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 53.1%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 48.68%Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 49.8%Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 48.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashResult
MRCRv2Source 77.3%Not comparable
MRCR 1MSource 26.6%Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 72.1%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 13.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 10.0%50.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 58.9%92.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-HLESource 4.9%41.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
GPQASource 92.2%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 92.7%Not comparable
HLESource 40.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 51.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 60.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 22.7%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 38.966%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 14.583%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 55.0%84.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
CharXivSource 84.2%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 83.6%Not comparable
Blueprint-Bench 2Source 33.6%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1285Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 1.5 ProGemini 3.5 FlashResult
IFBenchSource 76.3%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 76.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Gemini 1.5 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash 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 1.5 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash today?

Gemini 1.5 Pro: $1.25 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens Gemini 3.5 Flash: $1.50 input / $9.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 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.