Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

48.09/100
Margin
33.9pts
winning →
81.96/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 2.5 Flash #130 (Supported); GPT-5.6 Sol #3 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Gemini 2.5 Flash; 32 to GPT-5.6 Sol.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
14
Gemini 2.5 Flash only
1
GPT-5.6 Sol only
32
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GPT-5.6 Sol if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GPT-5.6 Sol is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 81.96 to 48.09. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GPT-5.6 Sol's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 87.5 against 4.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 4.844% to 89.000%.

GPT-5.6 Sol is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash. That is roughly 12.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.6 Sol is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 2.5 Flash is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.

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 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol
CategoryGemini 2.5 FlashΔGPT-5.6 Sol
MathGemini 2.5 Flash4.7Margin→ 82.8GPT-5.6 Sol87.5
AgenticGemini 2.5 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.6 Sol92.0
CodingGemini 2.5 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.6 Sol64.6
KnowledgeGemini 2.5 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.6 Sol94.6
MultimodalGemini 2.5 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.6 Sol83.0

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemini 2.5 FlashB · GPT-5.6 Sol

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 4.844%B 89.000%
    Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 84.2
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 2.5 Flash scored 4.844%; GPT-5.6 Sol scored 89.000%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark.

  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 4.167%B 83.000%
    Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 78.8
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Gemini 2.5 Flash scored 4.167%; GPT-5.6 Sol scored 83.000%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 2.5 Flash$0.3 input / $2.5 outputGPT-5.6 Sol$5 input / $30 outputGemini 2.5 Flash has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 2.5 Flash221 tok/sGPT-5.6 SolNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 2.5 Flash0.50 sGPT-5.6 SolNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 2.5 Flash1MGPT-5.6 Sol1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 14.9%85.1%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —91.9%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource —92.2%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source —62.6%Not comparable
CyberGymSource —84.5%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource —33.7%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource —58%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —54.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —61.8%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1736Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource —1501Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource —56.2%Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource —33.0%Not comparable
AA AutomationBenchSource —51.2%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource —87.2%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource —65.9%Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source —88%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolResult
AA-SciCodeSource 29.1%56.1%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
SWE-bench ProSource —64.6%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —91.9%Not comparable
deepSweSource —72.7%Not comparable
FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource —60.6%Not comparable
cursorBench32Source —67.2%Not comparable
VulcanBench v3Source —87.0%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —77.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolResult
AA-LCRSource 45.9%73.7%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
CritPtSource 1.4%32.3%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
ARC-AGI-3Source —7.8%Not comparable
GeneBench-ProSource —28.7%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 14.1%58.9%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 68.3%94.1%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
AA-HLESource 5.1%47.2%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -42.0%21.7%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 26.5%58.5%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 93.3%88.8%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPQASource —94.6%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource —94.6%Not comparable
HealthBench ProfessionalSource —60.5%Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource —33.1%Not comparable
MathGPT-5.6 Sol wins
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 4.844%89.000%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%83.000%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
FrontierMath (legacy)Source —89%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 65.5%83.4%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1145—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource —83%Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource —84.6%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 SolResult
AA-IFBenchSource 39.0%72.7%GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol?

GPT-5.6 Sol is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 81.96 to 48.09. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 4.844% and 89.000%.

Which is better for math, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol?

GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 87.5 versus 4.7. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Google Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
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.