Model Comparison

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs o3-miniWhich is better in 2026?

Comparing Gemini 3.6 Flash and o3-mini across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: Gemini 3.6 Flash vs o3-mini — which is better?

Gemini 3.6 Flash (by Google) and o3-mini (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, o3-mini is roughly 1.6x 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…

  • 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 o3-mini if…

  • cost matters — it's about 1.6x cheaper per token

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Gemini 3.6 Flash and o3-minidon'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

o3-mini costs less

For input processing, Gemini 3.6 Flash ($1.50/1M tokens) is 1.4x more expensive than o3-mini ($1.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 3.6 Flash ($7.50/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than o3-mini ($4.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Gemini 3.6 Flash is more expensive than o3-mini.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Jul 21 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Input tokens$1.50
Output tokens$7.50
Best providerGoogle
OpenAI
o3-mini
Input tokens$1.10
Output tokens$4.40
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 o3-mini's 200,000 tokens. o3-mini 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
o3-mini
Input200,000 tokens
Output100,000 tokens
Tue Jul 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemini 3.6 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas o3-mini 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

o3-mini

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

o3-mini

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 3.6 Flash was released on 2026-07-21, while o3-mini was released on 2025-01-30.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is 18 months newer than o3-mini.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Jul 21, 2026

0 days ago

1.5yr newer
o3-mini

Jan 30, 2025

1.5 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.6 Flash has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-03-31, while o3-mini has a cutoff of 2023-09-30.

Gemini 3.6 Flash has more recent training data (up to 2026-03-31), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to o3-mini (2023-09-30).

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Mar 2026

2.5 yr newer
o3-mini

Sep 2023

Provider Availability

Gemini 3.6 Flash is available from Google. o3-mini is available from Azure, OpenAI.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

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

o3-mini

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $1.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $1.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M
* 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
OpenAI
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.6 Flash and o3-mini side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 3.6 Flash
✓ Preferred
o3-mini
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash
OpenAI
o3-mini

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 3.6 Flash vs o3-mini.

Which is better, Gemini 3.6 Flash or o3-mini?

Gemini 3.6 Flash (Google) and o3-mini (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 o3-mini 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%. o3-mini scores COLLIE: 98.7%, MATH: 97.9%, IFEval: 93.9%, MGSM: 92.0%, AIME 2024: 87.3%.

Is Gemini 3.6 Flash cheaper than o3-mini?

o3-mini is 1.4x cheaper for input tokens. Gemini 3.6 Flash costs $1.50/M input and $7.50/M output via google. o3-mini costs $1.10/M input and $4.40/M output via azure.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 3.6 Flash and o3-mini?

Gemini 3.6 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and o3-mini 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 o3-mini?

Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 200K), input pricing ($1.50 vs $1.10/M), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 3.6 Flash and o3-mini?

Gemini 3.6 Flash is developed by Google and o3-mini is developed by OpenAI.

Related comparisons