Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Grok 4.3

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 25 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

64.75/100
Margin
0.3pts
winning →
65.1/100
3 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #33 (Estimated); Grok 4.3 #31 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash and Grok 4.3 share 25 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 21 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash; 0 to Grok 4.3.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
25
Gemini 3.5 Flash only
21
Grok 4.3 only
0
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 25 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Grok 4.3 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 65.1 versus 64.75. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Grok 4.3's sharpest advantage is in instruction following, where it averages 81.3 against 76.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SciCode, 53.1% to 47.3%. Gemini 3.5 Flash does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Gemini 3.5 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.50 input / $9.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok 4.3. That is roughly 3.6x on output cost alone.

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 3.5 Flash and Grok 4.3
CategoryGemini 3.5 FlashΔGrok 4.3
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash53.9Margin← 6.6Grok 4.347.3
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash83.8Margin← 5.7Grok 4.378.1
Inst. FollowingGemini 3.5 Flash76.3Margin→ 5.0Grok 4.381.3
KnowledgeGemini 3.5 Flash47.2Margin← 4.8Grok 4.342.4
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash77.2MarginNo overlapGrok 4.3Not measured
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash74.7MarginNo overlapGrok 4.3Not measured
MathGemini 3.5 Flash32.9MarginNo overlapGrok 4.3Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Gemini 3.5 FlashB · Grok 4.3

  1. SciCode

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 53.1%B 47.3%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 5.8
    SciCode: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 53.1%; Grok 4.3 scored 47.3%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

  2. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 83.6%B 78.1%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 5.5
    MMMU-Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 83.6%; Grok 4.3 scored 78.1%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

  3. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 40.2%B 35%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 5.2
    HLE: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 40.2%; Grok 4.3 scored 35%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

  4. IFBench

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 76.3%B 81.3%
    Winner: Grok 4.3Δ 5
    IFBench: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 76.3%; Grok 4.3 scored 81.3%. Grok 4.3 wins this benchmark.

  5. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 92.2%B 90.1%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 2.1
    GPQA: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 92.2%; Grok 4.3 scored 90.1%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.5 Flash$1.5 input / $9 outputGrok 4.3$1.25 input / $2.5 outputGrok 4.3 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.5 Flash284.2 tok/sGrok 4.3209 tok/sGemini 3.5 Flash has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.5 Flash18.55 sGrok 4.312.36 sGrok 4.3 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.5 Flash1MGrok 4.31MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Result
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 13491085Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.3%97.7%Grok 4.3 leads
GDPval-AASource 42.4%29.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 37.5%24.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 47.1%17.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gert LabsSource 61.85%43.86%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 18.0%12.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA AutomationBenchSource 42.6%—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 50.1%—Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 40.9%—Not comparable
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 76.2%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 55.1%—Not comparable
SciCodeSource 53.1%47.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 48.68%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 49.8%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 48.8%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 70.1%42.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.1%47.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Result
MRCRv2Source 77.3%—Not comparable
MRCR 1MSource 26.6%—Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 72.1%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.3%64.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
CritPtSource 13.1%8.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
KnowledgeGemini 3.5 Flash wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 50.2%37.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
GPQASource 92.2%90.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
GPQA-DSource 92.7%—Not comparable
HLESource 40.2%35%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 51.9%34.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 60.7%25.0%Grok 4.3 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.2%90.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-HLESource 41.0%35.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 22.7%18.3%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Math
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 38.966%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 14.583%—Not comparable
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Result
CharXivSource 84.2%—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 83.6%78.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Blueprint-Bench 2Source 33.6%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 84.3%78.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12851225Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Inst. FollowingGrok 4.3 wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.3Result
IFBenchSource 76.3%81.3%Grok 4.3 leads
AA-IFBenchSource 76.3%81.3%Grok 4.3 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Grok 4.3?

Grok 4.3 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.1 to 64.75. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SciCode, where the scores are 53.1% and 47.3%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Grok 4.3?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 47.2 versus 42.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Grok 4.3?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 53.9 versus 47.3. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Grok 4.3?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 78.1. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Grok 4.3?

Grok 4.3 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 81.3 versus 76.3. Inside this category, IFBench 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.