Gemini 2.5 Flash vs GPT-4o Mini
Data reconciled August 15, 2026
Short answer
Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-4o Mini each win on different axes — neither is simply cheaper or better across the board.
GPT-4o Mini is 2× cheaper on input.
GPT-4o Mini is 4.2× cheaper on output.
Gemini 2.5 Flash holds a 8.2× larger context window.
Gemini 2.5 Flash returns a 4× longer answer per call.
Reasoning mode is supported only by Gemini 2.5 Flash.
Side by side
| Parameter | Gemini 2.5 Flash | GPT-4o Mini |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google (Gemini) | OpenAI |
| Input, $ per 1M tokens | $0.30 | $0.15 |
| Output, $ per 1M tokens | $2.50 | $0.60 |
| Cache read, $ per 1M | $0.03 | $0.075 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 | 128,000 |
| Max output | 65,535 | 16,384 |
| Vision | yes | yes |
| Tools | yes | yes |
| Reasoning | yes | no |
| Status | available | available |
What it costs on your own workload
A price gap per million tokens says little until your volumes are plugged in: on a long fixed system prompt the winner is the model with cheap cache reads, not the one with a cheap input rate. Run Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-4o Mini against your own numbers.
Open the cost calculatorWhat is deliberately absent
We do not compare answer quality and we do not reprint third-party benchmarks. We have no quality measurements of our own, and external tables go stale faster than prices while being compiled, almost always, by someone with a stake in the result. What is here is only what we reconcile ourselves every day: prices, limits and supported capabilities.