Gemini 3.7 Flash
Proprietary CommercialDeveloped by Google · Released 2025-01-01
What are the token costs and operational benchmarks for Gemini 3.7 Flash?
Architectural Overview
Frontier foundation model developed by Google featuring Native Omni Reasoning Workhorse architecture.
Optimal Production Use Cases
2M+ context window ingestion, sub-100ms real-time audio/video streaming, high-speed coding agents, and cost-disruptive production intelligence.
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model your expected production workload across prompt (input) and completion (output) tokens.
Estimated Monthly Spend
$0.08/1M in · $0.32/1M out
$0.18/1M in · $0.72/1M out
Head-to-Head Comparisons Involving Gemini 3.7 Flash
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Claude 3.5 Haiku
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 90.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.80 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $4.00 for output tokens (10.0x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (65ms faster than Claude 3.5 Haiku). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 40.6% for Claude 3.5 Haiku.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 97.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $3.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $15.00 for output tokens (37.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (245ms faster than Claude 3.5 Sonnet). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 63.7% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 97.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $3.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $15.00 for output tokens (37.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (575ms faster than Claude 3.7 Sonnet). Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads coding benchmarks at 70.3% SWE-bench vs. 68.2% for Gemini 3.7 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Claude Opus 5
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 98.4% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $5.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $25.00 for output tokens (62.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (265ms faster than Claude Opus 5). Claude Opus 5 leads coding benchmarks at 82.4% SWE-bench vs. 68.2% for Gemini 3.7 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Codestral 25.01
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 73.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.30 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.90 for output tokens (3.8x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (75ms faster than Codestral 25.01). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 44.2% for Codestral 25.01.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Composer 2.5
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 95.6% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $1.80 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $7.20 for output tokens (22.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (105ms faster than Composer 2.5). Composer 2.5 leads coding benchmarks at 74.6% SWE-bench vs. 68.2% for Gemini 3.7 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs DeepSeek-R1
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 85.5% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.55 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $2.19 for output tokens (6.9x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (1725ms faster than DeepSeek-R1). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 49.2% for DeepSeek-R1.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs DeepSeek-V3
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 42.9% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.14 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.28 for output tokens (1.8x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (265ms faster than DeepSeek-V3). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 42.0% for DeepSeek-V3.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs DeepSeek-V4 Flash
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 42.9% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.14 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.56 for output tokens (1.8x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (75ms faster than DeepSeek-V4 Flash). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 62.4% for DeepSeek-V4 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Fable 5
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 96.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $2.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $8.00 for output tokens (25.0x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (165ms faster than Fable 5). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 58.0% for Fable 5.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Gemini 2.0 Flash
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 20.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.10 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.40 for output tokens (1.2x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (305ms faster than Gemini 2.0 Flash). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 48.0% for Gemini 2.0 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GLM 5.3 Flash
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 46.7% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.15 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.50 for output tokens (1.9x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (55ms faster than GLM 5.3 Flash). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 54.2% for GLM 5.3 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs OpenAI GPT-4o
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 96.8% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $2.50 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $10.00 for output tokens (31.2x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (205ms faster than OpenAI GPT-4o). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 38.8% for OpenAI GPT-4o.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 55.6% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.18 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.72 for output tokens (2.2x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (15ms faster than GPT-5.6 Luna). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 48.5% for GPT-5.6 Luna.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 99.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $8.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $32.00 for output tokens (100.0x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (345ms faster than GPT-5.6 Sol). GPT-5.6 Sol leads coding benchmarks at 79.5% SWE-bench vs. 68.2% for Gemini 3.7 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Terra
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 94.7% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $1.50 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $6.00 for output tokens (18.8x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (135ms faster than GPT-5.6 Terra). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 65.4% for GPT-5.6 Terra.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Grok 3
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 97.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $3.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $15.00 for output tokens (37.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (775ms faster than Grok 3). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 58.5% for Grok 3.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs xAI Grok 4.6
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 96.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $2.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $6.00 for output tokens (25.0x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (205ms faster than xAI Grok 4.6). xAI Grok 4.6 leads coding benchmarks at 76.8% SWE-bench vs. 68.2% for Gemini 3.7 Flash.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 55.6% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.18 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.40 for output tokens (2.2x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (345ms faster than Llama 3.3 70B Instruct). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 38.8% for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Mistral Large 2
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 96.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $2.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $6.00 for output tokens (25.0x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (475ms faster than Mistral Large 2). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 39.0% for Mistral Large 2.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs OpenAI o1
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 99.5% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $15.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $60.00 for output tokens (187.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (775ms faster than OpenAI o1). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 48.9% for OpenAI o1.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs o3-mini
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 92.7% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $1.10 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $4.40 for output tokens (13.8x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (1125ms faster than o3-mini). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 49.3% for o3-mini.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Microsoft Phi-4 (14B)
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 33.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.12 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.36 for output tokens (1.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (35ms faster than Microsoft Phi-4 (14B)). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 42.1% for Microsoft Phi-4 (14B).
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 2.5 72B Instruct
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 77.1% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.35 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.40 for output tokens (4.4x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (345ms faster than Qwen 2.5 72B Instruct). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 44.0% for Qwen 2.5 72B Instruct.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 2.5 Max
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 71.4% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.28 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.84 for output tokens (3.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (405ms faster than Qwen 2.5 Max). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 44.2% for Qwen 2.5 Max.
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 3.8 Flash Next
Gemini 3.7 Flash is 33.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.08 vs. $0.12 per 1M tokens) and $0.32 vs. $0.48 for output tokens (1.5x cost difference). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.7 Flash delivers faster response latency with 75ms TTFT (45ms faster than Qwen 3.8 Flash Next). Gemini 3.7 Flash leads coding benchmarks at 68.2% SWE-bench vs. 56.8% for Qwen 3.8 Flash Next.
Frequently Asked Questions & Query Fan-Out
How much does Gemini 3.7 Flash cost per 1M tokens?
Gemini 3.7 Flash costs $0.08 per million prompt (input) tokens and $0.32 per million completion (output) tokens.
What is the context window for Gemini 3.7 Flash?
Gemini 3.7 Flash supports a maximum context window of 2,097,152 tokens, with a maximum single-generation output of 65,536 tokens.
What are the primary use cases for Gemini 3.7 Flash?
2M+ context window ingestion, sub-100ms real-time audio/video streaming, high-speed coding agents, and cost-disruptive production intelligence.