Model Comparison

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs o1Which is better in 2026?

Comparing Gemini 3.6 Flash and o1 across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: Gemini 3.6 Flash vs o1 — which is better?

Gemini 3.6 Flash (by Google) and o1 (by OpenAI) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

On price, Gemini 3.6 Flash is roughly 8.8x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Gemini 3.6 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose Gemini 3.6 Flash if…

  • cost matters — it's about 8.8x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jul 2026

Choose o1 if…

  • you want predictable pricing at $15.00/M input and $60.00/M output

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Gemini 3.6 Flash and o1don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemini 3.6 Flash costs less

For input processing, Gemini 3.6 Flash ($1.50/1M tokens) is 10.0x cheaper than o1 ($15.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 3.6 Flash ($7.50/1M tokens) is 8.0x cheaper than o1 ($60.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, o1 is more expensive than Gemini 3.6 Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Jul 24 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Input tokens$1.50
Output tokens$7.50
Best providerGoogle
OpenAI
o1
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$60.00
Best providerAzure
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 3.6 Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to o1's 200,000 tokens. o1 can generate longer responses up to 100,000 tokens, while Gemini 3.6 Flash is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
OpenAI
o1
Input200,000 tokens
Output100,000 tokens
Fri Jul 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemini 3.6 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas o1 does not.

Gemini 3.6 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

o1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

o1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 3.6 Flash was released on 2026-07-21, while o1 was released on 2024-12-17.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is 19 months newer than o1.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Jul 21, 2026

2 days ago

1.6yr newer
o1

Dec 17, 2024

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.6 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-03-31, while o1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 3.6 Flash's training data extends to 2026-03-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without o1's cutoff date.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Mar 2026

o1

—

Provider Availability

Gemini 3.6 Flash is available from Google. o1 is available from Azure, OpenAI.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $1.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $7.50/1M

o1

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Google
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
OpenAI

No standout differentiators in the data we have for this pair.

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.6 Flash and o1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 3.6 Flash
✓ Preferred
o1
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash
OpenAI
o1

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 3.6 Flash vs o1.

Which is better, Gemini 3.6 Flash or o1?

Gemini 3.6 Flash (Google) and o1 (OpenAI) 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 3.6 Flash compare to o1 in benchmarks?

Gemini 3.6 Flash scores CharXiv-R: 89.4%, OSWorld-Verified: 83.0%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 78.0%, MLE-Bench: 63.9%, SWE-Bench Pro: 58.7%. o1 scores GSM8k: 97.1%, MATH: 96.4%, GPQA Physics: 92.8%, MMLU: 91.8%, MGSM: 89.3%.

Is Gemini 3.6 Flash cheaper than o1?

Gemini 3.6 Flash is 10.0x cheaper for input tokens. Gemini 3.6 Flash costs $1.50/M input and $7.50/M output via google. o1 costs $15.00/M input and $60.00/M output via azure.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 3.6 Flash and o1?

Gemini 3.6 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and o1 supports 200K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 3.6 Flash and o1?

Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 200K), input pricing ($1.50 vs $15.00/M), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 3.6 Flash and o1?

Gemini 3.6 Flash is developed by Google and o1 is developed by OpenAI.

Related comparisons