Roboflow

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

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

Compare Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Gemini 2.5 Pro 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
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGemini 2.5 Pro
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: Overview

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash, released on June 17, 2025, is Google DeepMind’s production-ready, efficiency-focused model in the Gemini 2.5 family. It is multimodal, accepting text, images, video, and audio as inputs, with text as the primary output format. The model supports 1 million input tokens and up to 65K output tokens, enabling it to process very large contexts such as books, long video transcripts, or extensive datasets. Its training knowledge extends to January 2025.

Designed as a price-performance leader, Gemini 2.5 Flash balances speed and reasoning power, making it suitable for everyday enterprise and developer use cases without the higher latency and cost of Pro models. It supports advanced workflows like function calling, code execution, search grounding, URL context ingestion, and structured outputs. While efficient and scalable, output length is still limited compared to its input capacity, and multimodal outputs (e.g. image or audio generation) remain restricted to specialized or preview variants.

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Gemini 2.5 Pro, released on June 17, 2025, is Google DeepMind’s most capable model in the Gemini 2.5 family, optimized for deep reasoning, coding, and complex multimodal tasks. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and PDFs as input and outputs text. The model supports 1 million input tokens with an output capacity of up to 65K tokens, enabling large-scale comprehension of datasets, codebases, and technical documents. Its training knowledge extends to January 2025.

Pro outperforms earlier Gemini 2.0 models across benchmarks, including agentic coding tasks where it achieved ~63.8% on SWE-Bench Verified. It supports structured outputs, function calling, code execution, search grounding, and URL context, making it well-suited for enterprise, STEM, and developer workflows. However, it does not currently support image or audio generation in its stable release, and its higher computational cost and latency make it less efficient than Flash or Flash-Lite. It is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, and Vertex AI.

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Gemini 2.5 Pro Comparison Table

PropertyGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Pro
OrganizationGoogleGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2025Jun 2025
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.300$1.25
Output $/1M$2.50$10.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
ClassificationDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
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
55.22%
70.15%
Avg Response Time24.91s11.87s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens294294
Median output tokens171565
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0005$0.0060
Defect Detection
60%(9/15)
73.3%(11/15)
Document Understanding
88.9%(8/9)
88.9%(8/9)
Object Counting
0%(0/10)
20%(2/10)
Object Understanding
71.4%(10/14)
78.6%(11/14)
Spatial Understanding
52.6%(10/19)
78.9%(15/19)
OCR
Overall Score
79.04%
78.6%
Avg Response Time2.39s4.91s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens290290
Median output tokens81323
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0003$0.0036
Focused Scene OCR
79.8%(79/99)
78.8%(78/99)
Handwritten Math
80%(8/10)
80%(8/10)
License Plate Recognition
90%(27/30)
90%(27/30)
Text Recognition
80%(24/30)
73.3%(22/30)
VQA & Extraction
71.7%(43/60)
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