Roboflow

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Grok 4.5

Compare Gemini 3.6 Flash and Grok 4.5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Classification, Image Captioning, OCR, and Object Detection.

Compare Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Grok 4.5 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 3.6 Flash
Run to compare this model.
GrokGrok 4.5
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Grok 4.5 on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.6 Flash scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 3.6 Flash leads 58.9% to 19.0%.

Overall, Gemini 3.6 Flash averages 83.3% (#10 of 61) against 65.8% (#42 of 61) for Grok 4.5.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is both cheaper ($0.0032 vs $0.0084 per sample) and faster (14.7s vs 20.8s per sample).

Gemini 3.6 FlashGrok 4.5

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Grok 4.5 Comparison Table

Evals updated September 29, 2026Pricing updated September 29, 2026

PropertyGemini 3.6 FlashGrok 4.5
OrganizationGoogleSpaceXAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Jul 2026
Context Window1.0M500K
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.750$2.00
Output $/1M$3.75$6.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Video Classification
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
83.3%
65.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0032$0.0084
Avg speed / sample14.66s20.75s
By task
Object Detection (low)
58.9%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.9 to 60.4
$0.0041
19.0%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 18.0 to 19.6
$0.011
Object Detection (high)
70.7%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.3 to 71.2
$0.0093
17.8%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 17.5 to 18.0
$0.020
Counting (low)
80.2%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4
$0.0034
59.5%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 62.2
$0.0065
Counting (high)
79.3%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.0 to 82.4
$0.0089
57.7%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 60.8
$0.012
Identification (low)
99.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0015
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0046
Identification (high)
100.0%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 100.0 to 100.0
$0.0033
85.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0067
OCR (low)
88.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.9 to 88.4
$0.0028
92.1%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.5
$0.0068
OCR (high)
89.5%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.5 to 89.6
$0.017
92.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.9
$0.012
Data Extraction (low)
95.9%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 94.8 to 96.9
$0.0015
83.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 84.5
$0.0044
Data Extraction (high)
94.8%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 95.9
$0.0032
81.8%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 83.5
$0.0061
Reasoning (low)
77.7%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.2 to 80.1
$0.0031
57.6%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 58.9
$0.0082
Reasoning (high)
81.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.5 to 83.4
$0.0091
59.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.0 to 62.3
$0.019

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Grok 4.5: Overview

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Gemini 3.6 Flash is a multimodal language model from Google DeepMind, positioned as the workhorse tier in the Gemini 3.x family. It accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs with a 1 million token context window and produces up to 64,000 output tokens. The model builds directly on Gemini 3.5 Flash, incorporating developer and customer feedback to improve token efficiency, coding quality, and knowledge work performance. According to the Artificial Analysis Index, it consumes 17% fewer output tokens than its predecessor, and on some benchmarks such as DeepSWE, token reduction reaches up to 65%. It supports function calling, structured output, search as a tool, and code execution, and includes computer use as a built-in capability in the Gemini API and Gemini Enterprise.

On coding benchmarks, Gemini 3.6 Flash scores 49% on DeepSWE versus 37% for 3.5 Flash, and 63.9% on MLE Bench versus 49.7%. Computer use performance on OSWorld-Verified improves from 78.4% to 83%, and knowledge work scores on GDPval-AA v2 rise from 1349 to 1421. The model carries a knowledge cutoff of March 2026 and ships with enhanced Frontier Safety safeguards covering chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and cyber offense domains, with training to minimize refusals for beneficial uses. It is a proprietary, closed-weights model available in preview through the Gemini API via Google AI Studio, Android Studio, Google Antigravity, Gemini Enterprise, and the Gemini app.

Grok 4.5

Grok 4.5 is a proprietary reasoning model from SpaceXAI (xAI) that accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window. xAI positions it as a model for coding, agentic software work, and knowledge tasks, and states it was trained in the company's Memphis data centers on datasets spanning science, engineering, and mathematics. Its reinforcement learning stage covers hundreds of thousands of multi step software engineering tasks scored by automated checks and model based grading, and training is reported to have run on tens of thousands of NVIDIA GB300 GPUs using an asynchronous scheme in which multi hour agentic rollouts continue while learning proceeds in parallel, targeting long horizon autonomous operation rather than single turn inference.

For vision, the model consumes JPEG and PNG images in any order relative to text prompts, covering visual question answering, description of chart and document imagery, and reading text rendered inside a scene. Reasoning effort is configurable, and the model supports function calling and structured outputs, so image inputs can be interleaved with tool calls inside agent loops. xAI has not published a technical report, architecture details, or parameter count, and reported mixture of experts sizing figures come from secondary coverage rather than official documentation.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.6 Flash performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 83.3% (#10 of 61) against 65.8% (#42 of 61) for Grok 4.5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Gemini 3.6 Flash leads with 58.9% against 19.0%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0032 per sample against $0.0084. Gemini 3.6 Flash is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $3.75 per 1M output; Grok 4.5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $6.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 14.7s per inference against 20.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for open prompts and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.