GPT-5.4 nano vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (12)
GPT-5.4 nano by OpenAI and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite by Google represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, GPT-5.4 nano holds a notable pricing advantage for token ingestion. On output generation, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is more economical per million generated tokens. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite provides an expanded memory horizon with 1,049K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.
Switch & Compare Any Models
Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.
GPT-5.4 nano
Cheapest 5.4The cheapest GPT-5.4 lane for simple routing, extraction and bulk automation.
$0.10 / 1M
$0.80 / 1M
400K tokens
48%
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
High-Volume LiteCost-optimized high-volume Flash model engineered for responsive interactive chatbots and extraction pipelines.
$0.15 / 1M
$0.60 / 1M
1.05M tokens
N/A
Key Differences at a Glance
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is 1.1x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has a larger context window (1M vs 400K tokens).
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is faster at 250 tok/s vs 235 tok/s.
| Feature | GPT-5.4 nano | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 45 | 60 |
Provider | OpenAI | |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $0.10 / 1M | $0.15 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $0.80 / 1M | $0.60 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $0.11 / 1M | $0.11 / 1M |
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens | 400K tokens~600 A4 pages of text | 1.05M tokens~1,573 A4 pages of text |
Max Output Tokens Per single request | 128K | 33K |
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second | 235 tok/s | 250 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | 48% | N/A |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | 61.5% | N/A |
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens | $0.01 / 1M | $0.04 / 1M |
Who Wins Where?
At-a-glance decision frameworkEvaluations ongoing
Empirical Head-to-Head Benchmark Scores
Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.
Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.
Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.
Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.
Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.
Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.
Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.
Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.
Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.
American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.
Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.
Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.
Latency & Response Time
Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.
Real-Time Interactive Token Cost Simulator
Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.
GPT-5.4 nano · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Very cheap for a model with reasoning and tools
- Low latency at high throughput
- Cheapest tier that still supports tool calling
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Weak reasoning — fine for routing, poor for analysis
- Prone to shallow answers on ambiguous prompts
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Extremely low cost per request
- Blazing fast 250 tps streaming
- 1M context window
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Lower complex reasoning capacity than Pro
- Simplified tool calling constraints
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 nano | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $0.11 | $0.38 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 44K | 14K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 19K | 5K |
Technical Specifications
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Feature | GPT-5.4 nano | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | gpt-5-4-nano | models/gemini-3-1-flash-lite |
| API Protocol | OpenAI Responses API & Chat Completions v1 | Google Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDK |
| Release Date | 2026-03 | 2026-03 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | August 2025 | November 2025 |
| Architecture | Nano agent-ready reasoning model | Compact efficient multimodal transformer |
| Parameters | Confidential | Confidential |
| Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM) | 10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 800,000 – 2,000,000 TPM | 10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM |
| Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K) | Flat rate ($0.1/1M in) across full 400K window | Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens |
| Prompt Cache Policy & TTL | Automatic prefix caching at $0.01/1M (no extra cache-write fee) | Implicit + Explicit Context Caching at $0.035/1M with configurable TTL |
| Computer Use / GUI Agent | Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops) | Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops) |
| MCP & Parallel Tool Calling | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema |
| Web Search Grounding & Sandbox | Native Web Search tool + Hosted Code Interpreter & File Search RAG | Built-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution Sandbox |
| Official Fine-Tuning Support | Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Direct Preference (DPO) & Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) | Vertex AI Supervised Adapter Tuning & Context Distillation |
| Multimodal Token Billing | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) |
| Quantization & Min GPU VRAM | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) |
| Safety & Frontier Classification | OpenAI Preparedness Framework Audited & System Card Published | Google DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework Verified |
| Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2) | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier |
| Input Modalities | text, vision | text, vision |
| Output Modalities | text | text |
GPT-5.4 nano vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: Quick Answers
Which is more intelligent, GPT-5.4 nano or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is more intelligent. It scores 60 compared with 45 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is faster?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is faster, generating 250 tokens per second compared with 235 tokens per second.
Which model has lower latency?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.27s compared with 0.40s.
Which model has a larger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has a larger context window, supporting 1.05M tokens compared with 400K tokens.
Verdict
Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose GPT-5.4 nano if your priority is Bulk automation, tagging and cheap agent routing. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite if your workflow prioritizes High-throughput microservices, translation, and large-scale document parsing. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.
Frequently asked questions
How does GPT-5.4 nano compare to Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite in API token pricing and cost per token?+
GPT-5.4 nano costs $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.80 per 1M output tokens, whereas Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite costs $0.15 input and $0.60 output. Overall, GPT-5.4 nano is the more cost-effective model for high-volume API pipelines. Both models support prompt caching discounts of up to 90% for repeated prompt prefixes.
Which model has a larger context window: GPT-5.4 nano or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?+
GPT-5.4 nano supports a context window of 400K tokens (~300k words), while Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite supports 1,049K tokens (~786k words). Therefore, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite can process more textual data and document context in a single prompt.
Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: GPT-5.4 nano or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?+
GPT-5.4 nano scores 48% on SWE-bench Verified, while Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite scores competitively for software generation. For complex autonomous debugging and agentic engineering, GPT-5.4 nano provides robust code generation and tool calling.
What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between GPT-5.4 nano and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?+
GPT-5.4 nano features native chain-of-thought extended thinking mode with configurable reasoning effort. In contrast, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite provides chain-of-thought reasoning depth for complex math and science.
How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between GPT-5.4 nano and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?+
GPT-5.4 nano generates approximately 235 tokens per second, while Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite delivers 250 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.
Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining GPT-5.4 nano and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite to optimize costs?+
Yes! High-efficiency architectures route high-frequency routine classification and conversational tasks to GPT-5.4 nano to save operational costs, and dynamically escalate complex architectural queries or reasoning tasks to Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite. This tiered routing pattern cuts overall API bills by up to 70%.
Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.
Related reading
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- GPT-5.4 mini vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- GPT-5.4 mini vs GPT-5.4 nano: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- GPT-5.4 nano vs GPT-5.3 Chat: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
- Aion-3.0 vs Aion-Mini: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonCompare
Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.
Sources: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs