💻 Coding (SWE) WinnerGPT-6.1 Sol 86.4% SWE-bench · 96.8% HumanEval
🧠 STEM Reasoning WinnerGPT-6.1 Sol 92.4% GPQA · 98.8% MATH-500
Which model is better: Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-6.1 Sol?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 85.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.30 vs. $2.00 per 1M tokens) and $2.50 vs. $10.00 for output tokens (6.7x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 2.5 Flash delivers lower response latency at 110ms TTFT (410ms faster than GPT-6.1 Sol) with 180 vs. 135 tok/s throughput. GPT-6.1 Sol leads coding evaluations at 86.4% SWE-bench Verified vs. 58.0% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 92.4% vs. 70.5% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Gemini 2.5 Flash
GPT-6.1 Sol
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$0.30
$2.00
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 6.7x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$2.50
$10.00
Gemini 2.5 Flash (75.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.030
$0.100
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 3.3x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$0.30
$2.00
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 6.7x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
1,049k (66k out)
1,075k (128k out)
GPT-6.1 Sol (1.0x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
110ms
520ms
Gemini 2.5 Flash (410ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
180 tok/s
135 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Flash (+45 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
58%
86.4%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+28.4% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
70.5%
92.4%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+21.9% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
82%
91%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+9.0% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
89%
98.8%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+9.8% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
66.6 / 100
62.9 / 100
Gemini 2.5 Flash (+3.7 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) for delivers near-GPT-6 Astra frontier accuracy at one-fifth the token cost with a 95% cache read discount for high-efficiency agentic coding, computer use, and enterprise workflow automation — offering a 1,075k context window, 520ms TTFT, and $2.00/1M input pricing ($0.100/1M cached reads).
Which is cheaper: Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-6.1 Sol?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30/1M input tokens ($2.50/1M output) compared to $2.00/1M input ($10.00/1M output) for GPT-6.1 Sol.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-6.1 Sol?
Gemini 2.5 Flash delivers faster first-token latency at 110ms TTFT (180 tok/s throughput) compared to 520ms TTFT (135 tok/s) for GPT-6.1 Sol.
How do Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-6.1 Sol compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Gemini 2.5 Flash scores 58% versus 86.4% for GPT-6.1 Sol. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Gemini 2.5 Flash scores 70.5% versus 92.4% for GPT-6.1 Sol (and 89% vs 98.8% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash (Google) for cost-efficient 1M-context summarization, multimodal extraction, and interactive assistants — offering a 1,048k context window, 110ms TTFT, and $0.30/1M input pricing ($0.030/1M cached reads).
When should you choose GPT-6.1 Sol?
Choose GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) for delivers near-GPT-6 Astra frontier accuracy at one-fifth the token cost with a 95% cache read discount for high-efficiency agentic coding, computer use, and enterprise workflow automation — offering a 1,075k context window, 520ms TTFT, and $2.00/1M input pricing ($0.100/1M cached reads).
