Roboflow

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Grok 4.5

Compare Gemini 3.8 Flash and Grok 4.5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, and Open Prompt.

Compare Gemini 3.8 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 3.8 Flash
Run to compare this model.
GrokGrok 4.5
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Grok 4.5 on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.8 Flash scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 3.8 Flash leads 68.1% to 19.0%.

Overall, Gemini 3.8 Flash averages 79.8% (#7 of 63) against 55.3% (#46 of 63) for Grok 4.5.

Gemini 3.8 Flash is both cheaper ($0.0045 vs $0.0078 per sample) and faster (12.8s vs 16.4s per sample).

Gemini 3.8 FlashGrok 4.5

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Grok 4.5 Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 22, 2026

PropertyGemini 3.8 FlashGrok 4.5
OrganizationGoogleSpaceXAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Jul 2026
Context Window1.0M500K
ParametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.825$2.00
Output $/1M$4.13$6.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
79.8%
55.3%
Avg cost / sample$0.0045$0.0078
Avg speed / sample12.76s16.41s
By task
Object Detection (low)
68.1%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.3 to 69.0
$0.0045
19.0%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 18.0 to 19.6
$0.011
Object Detection (high)
74.8%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.4 to 75.6
$0.023
17.8%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 17.5 to 18.0
$0.020
Counting (low)
78.8%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 81.1
$0.0040
59.5%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 62.2
$0.0065
Counting (high)
79.3%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.027
57.7%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 60.8
$0.012
Identification (low)
97.9%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0016
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0046
Identification (high)
96.9%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9
$0.0037
85.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0067
OCR (low)
72.8%
$0.0049
57.1%
$0.0065
by category
Single value
73.5%
Transcription
91.3%
Structured JSON
86.1%
Text localization
26.4%
Single value
47.8%
Transcription
85.4%
Structured JSON
80.3%
Text localization
6.1%
OCR (high)
78.7%
$0.039
57.5%
$0.013
by category
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
94.1%
Structured JSON
90.9%
Text localization
58.6%
Single value
47.8%
Transcription
86.1%
Structured JSON
80.9%
Text localization
7.0%
Reasoning (low)
81.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.8 to 81.5
$0.0038
57.6%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 58.9
$0.0082
Reasoning (high)
84.5%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 83.4 to 85.4
$0.023
59.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.0 to 62.3
$0.019

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Grok 4.5: Overview

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Gemini 3.8 Flash is a natively multimodal reasoning model in Google's Gemini 3 series, positioned as the speed and cost oriented Flash tier while targeting long-horizon software engineering, autonomous agents, and enterprise workflows. It accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents in a single request and returns text, with an input limit of 1,048,576 tokens and an output limit of 65,536 tokens. Thinking is configurable at low, medium, and high levels, and the model supports function calling, code execution, structured outputs, context caching, search and Maps grounding, file search, and computer use in preview. Image generation, audio generation, and the Live API are not supported.

On vision oriented evaluations the model reports 86.2% on CharXiv Reasoning for chart and figure synthesis and 87.8% on LVBench for long video understanding in agentic mode, alongside 90.8% on Terminal-Bench 2.1 and 61.6% on SWE-Bench Pro for coding. Following Gemini API conventions, it can localize objects by emitting bounding boxes as [ymin, xmin, ymax, xmax] integers normalized to a 0 to 1000 range, which supports prompt driven detection and grounding in addition to captioning, document parsing, and visual question answering. The knowledge cutoff is March 2026, though coverage in some domains reflects the January 2025 cutoff shared across the Gemini 3 family.

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.