Roboflow

Gemini 3 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol

Compare Gemini 3 Flash and GPT-6 Sol side-by-side.

Compare Gemini 3 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol live

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

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

OpenAI

Gemini 3 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol on Vision Evals

GPT-6 Sol scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where GPT-6 Sol leads 73.6% to 38.6%.

Overall, Gemini 3 Flash averages 74.9% (#17 of 57) against 80.7% (#10 of 57) for GPT-6 Sol.

Gemini 3 Flash is both cheaper ($0.0021 vs $0.0065 per sample) and faster (4.1s vs 8.1s per sample).

Gemini 3 FlashGPT-6 Sol

Gemini 3 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol Comparison Table

Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026

PropertyGemini 3 FlashGPT-6 Sol
OrganizationGoogleOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateDec 2025Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.1M
Parametersundisclosed
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.500$2.00
Output $/1M$3.00$10.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
74.9%
80.7%
Avg cost / sample$0.0021$0.0065
Avg speed / sample4.10s8.15s
By task
Object Detection (low)
38.6%
$0.0031
73.6%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.9 to 74.2
$0.011
Object Detection (high)
75.2%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.1 to 75.9
$0.022
Counting (low)
67.6%
$0.0012
74.8%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 77.0
$0.0039
Counting (high)
76.1%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 78.4
$0.0071
Identification (low)
93.8%
$0.0009
91.7%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0027
Identification (high)
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0036
OCR (low)
87.6%
$0.0024
91.7%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.3 to 92.1
$0.0070
OCR (high)
91.9%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.6 to 92.2
$0.019
Data Extraction (low)
96.9%
$0.0008
80.4%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 80.4
$0.0031
Data Extraction (high)
82.5%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5
$0.0045
Reasoning (low)
64.9%
$0.0020
72.2%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.9 to 74.2
$0.0039
Reasoning (high)
74.2%
$0.0040
77.9%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 80.8
$0.0069

Gemini 3 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol: Overview

Gemini 3 Flash

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.

GPT-6 Sol

GPT-6 Sol is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from OpenAI, released on September 22, 2026 alongside GPT-6 Luna as an efficiency-oriented tier of the GPT-6 family that began with GPT-6 Astra. OpenAI states that Sol and Luna are trained with methods similar to those used for Astra, carrying the same work on professional tasks, factuality, coding, computer use, and alignment into models that run faster. Sol accepts text and image input and returns text output, and OpenAI documents a context window of roughly one million tokens together with a knowledge cutoff of April 20, 2026.

The model targets complex coding and agentic workflows and exposes a configurable reasoning effort setting with levels of none, low, medium, high, xhigh, and max, which trades latency and token consumption against answer quality. OpenAI reports results including 33.2% on AutomationBench at xhigh effort and 56.4% on Agents' Last Exam at max effort, while its reported DeepSWE and OSWorld 2.0 figures of 68.8% and 64.4% fall below those of the earlier GPT-5.6 Sol. Its vision behavior covers image understanding tasks such as visual question answering, captioning, document and chart interpretation, and text recognition.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6 Sol performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 80.7% (#10 of 57) against 74.9% (#17 of 57) 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, GPT-6 Sol leads with 73.6% 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 $0.0021 per sample against $0.0065. Gemini 3 Flash is priced at $0.50 per 1M input tokens and $3.00 per 1M output; GPT-6 Sol is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Gemini 3 Flash is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 4.1s per inference against 8.1s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.