Gemini 3 Flash vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Gemini 4 Hydrogen and Gemini 3 Flash score 87.3% vs 65.7% averaged across five Vision Evals tasks (#3 and #33 of 69 models), so Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads overall.
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen wins all 5 tasks, with its widest lead on object detection (81.0% vs 38.6%).
- Gemini 3 Flash is about a quarter of the cost: $0.0024 vs $0.0094 overall average cost per sample.
- Gemini 3 Flash is faster: 5.8s vs 13.2s per sample.
Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.
Compare Gemini 3 Flash vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Gemini 3 Flash vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen on Vision Evals
Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.
Gemini 3 Flash vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen Comparison Table
Evals updated November 12, 2026Pricing updated November 13, 2026
| Property | Gemini 3 Flash | Gemini 4 Hydrogen |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | ||
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Dec 2025 | Nov 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.500 | No published price |
| Output $/1M | $3.00 | No published price |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Not listed |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Not listed |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Not listed |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Not listed |
| Promptable Concept Segmentation | Not listed | Demo |
Both support 6 more tasks | ||
| Model Features | ||
Both support 3 more features | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 65.7% | 87.3% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0024 | $0.0094 |
| Avg speed / sample | 5.83s | 13.23s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 38.6% | 81.0% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.3 to 81.9 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 83.3% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.4 to 83.8 |
| Counting (low) | 67.6% | 83.8% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.4 to 86.5 |
| Counting (high) | – | 84.2% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.4 to 87.8 |
| Identification (low) | 93.8% | 96.9% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9 |
| Identification (high) | – | 96.9% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9 |
| OCR (low) | 63.9% | 86.7% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 73.1% | 87.2% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 64.9% | 88.1% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.4 to 88.7 |
| Reasoning (high) | 74.2% | 91.8% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.4 to 92.0 |
Gemini 3 Flash vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen: Overview
Gemini 3 Flash is a proprietary multimodal large language model developed by Google through Google DeepMind, designed to deliver fast, cost-efficient reasoning across real-time products and developer workflows. Released in December 2025, it is the Flash-tier variant of the Gemini 3 family, balancing low latency with reasoning quality approaching Pro models.
The model supports text, images, audio, and video, with an exceptionally large context window of roughly one million input tokens and outputs up to ~65k tokens. It emphasizes rapid responses for coding, summarization, analysis, and agentic tasks, and exposes configurable “thinking levels” via API to trade speed for deeper reasoning. Today, Gemini 3 Flash positions itself as a high-throughput, production-ready model, serving as the default in the Gemini app and Google Search’s AI Mode, optimized for scalable, interactive AI applications.
Gemini 4 Hydrogen is a multimodal model from Google, positioned as a successor to Gemini 3.8 Flash with stronger agent and coding capabilities at Flash-class speed.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 4 Hydrogen performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 87.3% (#3 of 69) against 65.7% (#33 of 69) for Gemini 3 Flash. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads with 81.0% against 38.6%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 3 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0024 per sample against $0.0094. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Gemini 3 Flash is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.8s per inference against 13.2s. 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 object detection and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.