Intelligence
11 scoreGoogle · Flagships Analysis
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Intelligence, Performance & Price Analysis
Canonical slug: gemini-2-5-flash-lite-reasoning · Canonical model registry at build time
Speed
287.0 output tokens/secLatency
29.36s TTFTInput Price
$0.10 / 1M tokensOutput Price
$0.40 / 1M tokensExecutive Assessment
Routing Verdict & Tradeoffs
Ethen Routing Verdict
Capable everyday model
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) scores 11 (estimated) on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, placing it below average among other reasoning models in a similar price tier (median: 15). Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) generates output at 287.0 tokens per second (based on Google's API), which is well above average compared to other reasoning models in a similar price tier (median: 99.1 t/s). Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) costs $0.10 per 1M input tokens (very competitive, median: $0.25) and $0.40 per 1M output tokens (very competitive, median: $0.87), based on Google's API.
Good for routine tasks; route complex reasoning and premium workloads to stronger models.
Task Fit Assessment
| Workload | Rating | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Complex reasoning & agentic workflows | viable | Intelligence score 11 handles routine reasoning but may struggle with open-ended agentic tasks. |
| High-volume chat & customer-facing | optimal | Output speed 287.0 tokens/sec and capable intelligence make this suitable for real-time chat at scale. |
| Latency-sensitive applications | viable | TTFT 29.36s — latency may be noticeable in interactive use. |
| Cost-sensitive pipelines | optimal | Output pricing at $0.40 is very competitive for high-volume workloads. |
Cost Pressure Analysis
Low
Pricing is competitive — input $0.10, output $0.40. Suitable for sustained production use.
Technical Specifications
Architecture and Limits
| Specification | Value | Validation Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Model type | Proprietary | inferred |
| Reasoning | Yes | faq |
| Input modalities | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) supports text, image, speech, and video input. | faq |
| Output modalities | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) supports text output. | faq |
| Context window | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) has a context window of 1.0M tokens. This determines how much text and conversation history the model can process in a single request. | faq |
| Open weights / source | No, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is proprietary. The model weights are not publicly available. | faq |
| Parameters | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is a proprietary model and Google has not disclosed the model size or parameter count. | faq |
| Knowledge cutoff | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) has a knowledge cutoff of January 2025. The model's training data includes information up to this date. | faq |
| API availability | Yes, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is available via API through 1 provider. | faq |
Evidence charts
Profile visualizations
Charts are the same canonical evidence cards previously published for this slug, contained inside the D18D page grammar.
AA-Omniscience Index
AA-Omniscience Index (higher is better) measures knowledge reliability and hallucination. It rewards correct answers, penalizes hallucinations, and has no penalty for refusing to answer. Scores range from -100 to 100, where 0 means as many correct as incorrect answers, and negative scores mean more incorrect than correct. · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Bars intentionally show many models at once so the page feels like a benchmark report rather than a dashboard.
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index by Open Weights / Proprietary
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 incorporates 9 evaluations: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Higher values indicate stronger overall capability. Bars show how models compare on composite intelligence metrics.
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 incorporates 9 evaluations: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Higher values indicate stronger overall capability. Bars show how models compare on composite intelligence metrics.
Intelligence
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Higher values indicate stronger overall capability. Bars show how models compare on composite intelligence metrics.
Output Speed
Output tokens per second · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Speed should be read together with latency and cost; fast output does not always mean better user-perceived performance.
Speed
Output tokens per second · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Speed should be read together with latency and cost; fast output does not always mean better user-perceived performance.
End-to-End Response Time
Seconds to output 500 tokens, including reasoning model 'thinking' time · Lower is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Bars intentionally show many models at once so the page feels like a benchmark report rather than a dashboard.
Latency: Time To First Answer Token
Seconds to first answer token received · Accounts for reasoning model 'thinking' time · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Latency includes thinking / reasoning time when applicable. Lower is better for interactive use cases.
Context Window
Context window: tokens limit · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Larger context windows enable complex multi-turn tasks but may increase latency and cost for long inputs.
Cost per Intelligence Index Task
Weighted average cost (USD) per Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index task, segmented by token type. Lower is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Higher values indicate stronger overall capability. Bars show how models compare on composite intelligence metrics.
Ethen Gateway should route away from this model when the task is simple, repetitive, or likely to generate many output tokens.
Cost per Task
Weighted average cost (USD) per Intelligence Index task · Lower is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Ethen Gateway should route away from this model when the task is simple, repetitive, or likely to generate many output tokens.
Cost to Run Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
Cost (USD) to run all evaluations in the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Higher values indicate stronger overall capability. Bars show how models compare on composite intelligence metrics.
Ethen Gateway should route away from this model when the task is simple, repetitive, or likely to generate many output tokens.
Pricing: Cache Hit, Input, and Output
Price (USD per M Tokens) · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Bars intentionally show many models at once so the page feels like a benchmark report rather than a dashboard.
Time per Intelligence Index Task
Weighted average decode time (minutes) per task; excludes TTFT and overhead time · Lower is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis
Retrieved 2026-07-08
Chart source and provenance are listed in Methodology & sources below.
- Source:
- Published benchmark dataset
- Retrieval date:
- 2026-07-08
- Methodology:
- Independent test run by Artificial Analysis on dedicated hardware.
Higher values indicate stronger overall capability. Bars show how models compare on composite intelligence metrics.
Methodology
Methodology & Provenance
This page is rendered from the normalized profile and page JSON for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.
Benchmark values are preserved as normalized; only layout, disclosure ordering, and typography are adjusted for readability.
Frequently Asked Questions
Model FAQs & Technical Disclosures
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) was released on June 17, 2025.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) was created by Google.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) scores 11 (estimated) on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, placing it below average among other reasoning models in a similar price tier (median: 15).
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) generates output at 287.0 tokens per second (based on Google's API), which is well above average compared to other reasoning models in a similar price tier (median: 99.1 t/s).
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) has a time to first token (TTFT) of 29.36s (based on Google's API), which is at the higher end compared to other reasoning models in a similar price tier (median: 1.95s).
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) costs $0.10 per 1M input tokens (very competitive, median: $0.25) and $0.40 per 1M output tokens (very competitive, median: $0.87), based on Google's API.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) costs $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.40 per 1M output tokens (based on Google's API). For a blended rate (7:2:1 cache hit/input/output ratio), this is $0.07 per 1M tokens. Pricing may vary by provider.
Yes, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is a reasoning model. It uses extended thinking or chain-of-thought reasoning to work through complex problems before providing an answer.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) supports text, image, speech, and video input.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) supports text output.
Yes, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) supports image input and can analyze, describe, and answer questions about images.
Yes, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is multimodal. It can process text, image, speech, and video input and generate text output.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) has a context window of 1.0M tokens. This determines how much text and conversation history the model can process in a single request.
No, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is proprietary. The model weights are not publicly available.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is a proprietary model and Google has not disclosed the model size or parameter count.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) achieves a score of 11 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index. This composite benchmark evaluates models across reasoning, knowledge, mathematics, and coding.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) has a knowledge cutoff of January 2025. The model's training data includes information up to this date.
Yes, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is available via API through 1 provider.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Reasoning) is available through 1 API provider.