Gemini 2.5 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Terra

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,417.3198% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-flash; 95% CI [1414.86923843, 1419.74079237]; votes 122770; rank 1111,446.72100% of row best · rating · gpt-5.6-terra-xhigh; 95% CI [1441.68248185, 1451.74987487]; votes 23942; rank 47
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-08-27-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,235.7697% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-flash; 95% CI [1231.05290901, 1240.46508391]; votes 58968; rank 591,268.99100% of row best · rating · gpt-5.6-terra-xhigh; 95% CI [1259.82673197, 1278.15538857]; votes 5774; rank 33
ToneBench2026-08-14-10-task · overall_score · leader73.8385% of row best · points · Gemini 2.5 Flash · 4,339 output tokens / case86.60100% of row best · points · GPT-5.6 Terra (xhigh) · 4,819 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark wins3 benchmark winsOverall lead

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

FieldAt a Glance
Google DeepMind · activeGemini 2.5 FlashVerified Aug 29, 2026
OpenAI · activeGPT-5.6 TerraVerified Aug 28, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 Terra
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindOpenAI
FamilyGemini 2 5Gpt 5 6
ModelGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 Terra
VersionGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.6 Terra
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknownUnknown
Knowledge cutoff2025-01-012026-02-16
Input modalitiesText, Image, Video, AudioText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,048,5761,050,000
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessGoogle AI (Standard)OpenAI (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

14 comparable fields · 8 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Gemini 2.5 Flash Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$0.30
Output price$2.50
Serving providers1
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-2.5-flash

GPT-5.6 Terra Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$2.00
Output price$12.00
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-5.6-terra

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All text comparisons →
APairBContext
vsfamily variantstext
vsfamily variantstext
vsfamily variantstext
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vsfamily variantstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Terra FAQs

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.6 Terra, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra?+

Gemini 2.5 Flash is $0.30 and GPT-5.6 Terra is $2.00 per million tokens, so Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Gemini 2.5 Flash is $2.50 and GPT-5.6 Terra is $12.00 per million tokens, so Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra?+

GPT-5.6 Terra has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 2.5 Flash supports 1,048,576 and GPT-5.6 Terra supports 1,050,000.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra?+

GPT-5.6 Terra leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 3 protocol-matched benchmarks from 2 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.

Can Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Gemini 2.5 Flash is not marked open weight; GPT-5.6 Terra is not marked open weight.

Can Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.6 Terra understand images?+

Gemini 2.5 Flash is documented with image input; GPT-5.6 Terra is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra?+

GPT-5.6 Terra has the larger sourced maximum output: Gemini 2.5 Flash supports 65,536 and GPT-5.6 Terra supports 128,000 output tokens.

Do Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.6 Terra support reasoning and tool use?+

Gemini 2.5 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GPT-5.6 Terra: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra?+

Gemini 2.5 Flash has 1 sourced provider route; GPT-5.6 Terra has 2, so GPT-5.6 Terra has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.6 Terra?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback