Roboflow

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT-4o mini

Compare Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and GPT-4o mini side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Object Detection, OCR, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT-4o mini live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-4o mini

GPT-4o mini is deprecated and can no longer be run. Details and evals are still available on its model page.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT-4o mini: Overview

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite, released for general availability on July 22, 2025, is the most cost-efficient model in the Gemini 2.5 family, designed for high-volume and latency-sensitive tasks. It is multimodal, supporting text, images, video, audio, and PDFs as inputs, with text as its primary output. The model handles up to 1 million input tokens and generates outputs up to 64K tokens, making it suitable for large-scale document or media processing at low cost. It is built on a Sparse Mixture-of-Experts architecture with native multimodal support, though exact parameter counts are undisclosed.

Flash-Lite offers the lowest usage cost among Gemini 2.5 models. It introduces developer controls for “thinking mode,” allowing fine-tuning of reasoning depth vs. efficiency. It also integrates native tools such as code execution, search grounding, and URL context. While strong on translation, classification, coding, and general multimodal reasoning, it lacks support for image or audio generation in its stable release and is less capable than Gemini 2.5 Flash or Pro on complex reasoning-heavy workflows.

GPT-4o mini

GPT-4o mini, launched by OpenAI in July 2024, is a lightweight, cost-efficient variant of GPT-4o designed for developers who need strong multimodal reasoning at scale. It supports text and vision inputs (with audio/video support planned) and offers a 128,000-token input context window with outputs up to ~16,000 tokens. Like GPT-4o, it has a knowledge cutoff of October 2023 and integrates the same safety mitigations against misuse and prompt attacks.

GPT-4o mini is significantly cheaper than full GPT-4o while outperforming older models such as GPT-3.5 Turbo. It achieves around 82% on MMLU, reflecting solid reasoning, math, and coding capabilities despite its efficiency focus. The model replaced GPT-3.5 Turbo as the default in ChatGPT for many users, making it widely accessible for everyday conversational AI, educational tools, content generation, and scalable multimodal applications where affordability and speed are priorities.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT-4o mini Comparison Table

PropertyGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGPT-4o mini
OrganizationGoogleOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2025Jul 2024
Context Window1.0M128K
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.100$0.150
Output $/1M$0.400$0.600
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
ClassificationDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
53.73%
Avg Response Time7.19s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens294
Median output tokens6
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark<$0.0001
Defect Detection
66.7%(10/15)
Document Understanding
66.7%(6/9)
Object Counting
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
71.4%(10/14)
Spatial Understanding
47.4%(9/19)
OCR
Overall Score
77.73%
Avg Response Time7.45s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens290
Median output tokens12
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark<$0.0001
Focused Scene OCR
75.8%(75/99)
Handwritten Math
70%(7/10)
License Plate Recognition
90%(27/30)
Text Recognition
80%(24/30)
VQA & Extraction
75%(45/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology