The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemini 3.7 Flash

Comparing Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.7 Flash across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Google · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.7 Flash trade strengths across price, capabilities, and technical limits. The better choice depends on the workload.

On price, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is roughly 8.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Based on current benchmark, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

  • cost matters — it's about 8.6x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Gemini 3.7 Flash

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Google
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Google
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.10 / M
$0.75 / M
Output price
$0.40 / M
$3.75 / M
Context window
1,048,576
1,048,576
Released
Jun 2025
Aug 2026
License
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
Proprietary

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.7 Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs less

For input processing, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite ($0.10/1M tokens) is 7.5x cheaper than Gemini 3.7 Flash ($0.75/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite ($0.40/1M tokens) is 9.4x cheaper than Gemini 3.7 Flash ($3.75/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Gemini 3.7 Flash is more expensive than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Aug 25 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerGoogle
Google
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Input tokens$0.75
Output tokens$3.75
Best providerGoogle
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 1,048,576 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 65,536 tokens.

Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Google
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Tue Aug 25 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.7 Flash support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemini 3.7 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License, while Gemini 3.7 Flash uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License

Open weights

Gemini 3.7 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite was released on 2025-06-17, while Gemini 3.7 Flash was released on 2026-08-13.

Gemini 3.7 Flash is 14 months newer than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Jun 17, 2025

1.2 years ago

Gemini 3.7 Flash

Aug 13, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.2yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has a knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-01, while Gemini 3.7 Flash has a cutoff of 2026-03-31.

Gemini 3.7 Flash has more recent training data (up to 2026-03-31), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (2025-01-01).

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Jan 2025

Gemini 3.7 Flash

Mar 2026

1.2 yr newer

Provider Availability

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is available from Google. Gemini 3.7 Flash is available from Google.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M

Gemini 3.7 Flash

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.75/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.75/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.7 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
✓ Preferred
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemini 3.7 Flash.

Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Gemini 3.7 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Google) and Gemini 3.7 Flash (Google) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite compare to Gemini 3.7 Flash in benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores FACTS Grounding: 84.1%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 81.1%, MMMU: 72.9%, GPQA: 64.6%, Vibe-Eval: 51.3%. Gemini 3.7 Flash scores MRCR v2 (8-needle): 97.0%, Harvey LAB-AA: 90.7%, CharXiv-R: 88.7%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 85.8%, LVBench: 85.4%.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite cheaper than Gemini 3.7 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is 7.5x cheaper for input tokens. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output via google. Gemini 3.7 Flash costs $0.75/M input and $3.75/M output via google.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.7 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite supports 1.0M tokens and Gemini 3.7 Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Gemini 3.7 Flash?

Key differences include input pricing ($0.10 vs $0.75/M), licensing (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Related comparisons