Google Proprietary Released May 20, 2025 Updated
Gemini 2.5 Flash
ToolsGuide Scores, rankings, test results and price.
Model summary
Summary
Gemini 2.5 Flash is Google's model, released May 20, 2025. It's ranked in 2 categories and does best at text: #173 of 416, with a ToolsGuide Score of 270 against a median of 235.
It also ranks #92 of 167 for vision (321).
It costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens, below the median text model ($0.43).
It has published results on 16 tests.
Specifications
- Creator
Google
- Licence
- Proprietary
- Released
- May 20, 2025
- Context window
- 1M tokens
- Input price
- $0.30 / 1M
- Output price
- $2.50 / 1M
- Tests reported
- 16
- Settings ranked
- gemini-2.5-flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash
Model comparison
Against the ten best text models.
Text score
ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000 · Higher is better
Vision score
ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000 · Higher is better
Input price
USD per 1M input tokens · Lower is better
Leaderboards
Where Gemini 2.5 Flash sits among the top 20 in each category.
Text
#173 of 416 · ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000, where 1,000 is a flawless model
Vision
#92 of 167 · ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000, where 1,000 is a flawless model
By task
Scored from votes on each kind of prompt alone, on the same 1,000-point scale.
Score against price
Text · the 10 priced models ranked closest · up and to the left is better value
Against its nearest rivals
Text prompts by kind · ToolsGuide Score from votes · hover for values
-
Gemini 2.5 Flash
-
qwen3-vl-235b-a22b-instruct
-
gpt-oss-120b
Text
gemini-2.5-flash · hover a bar for its rank
Vision
Gemini 2.5 Flash · hover a bar for its rank
Test results
Every test Gemini 2.5 Flash has a published result on, out of 100%, with its rank among the models that took it.
GPQA
#84 / 256Graduate-level science questions written to be hard to look up.
82.8%
Self-reported
AIME 2025
#93 / 123Competition maths problems from the 2025 American Invitational Mathematics Exam.
72.0%
Self-reported
SWE-Bench Verified
#89 / 120Fixing real bugs in real GitHub projects, checked by the projects' own tests.
60.4%
Self-reported
Humanity's Last Exam
#94 / 108Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) is a multi-modal academic benchmark with 2,500 questions across mathematics, humanities, and natural sciences, designed to test LLM capabilities at the frontier of human knowledge with unambiguous, verifiable solutions
11.0%
Self-reported · In the text score· In the vision score
MMMU
#15 / 66MMMU (Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding) is a benchmark designed to evaluate multimodal models on college-level subject knowledge and deliberate reasoning. Contains 11.5K meticulously collected multimodal questions from college exams, quizzes, and textbooks, covering six core disciplines: Art & Design, Business, Science, Health & Medicine, Humanities & Social Science, and Tech & Engineering across 30 subjects and 183 subfields.
79.7%
Self-reported
AIME 2024
#11 / 54American Invitational Mathematics Examination 2024, consisting of 30 challenging mathematical reasoning problems from AIME I and AIME II competitions. Each problem requires an integer answer between 0-999 and tests advanced mathematical reasoning across algebra, geometry, combinatorics, and number theory. Used as a benchmark for evaluating mathematical reasoning capabilities in large language models at Olympiad-level difficulty.
88.0%
Self-reported
SimpleQA
#28 / 47SimpleQA is a factuality benchmark developed by OpenAI that measures the short-form factual accuracy of large language models. The benchmark contains 4,326 short, fact-seeking questions that are adversarially collected and designed to have single, indisputable answers. Questions cover diverse topics from science and technology to entertainment, and the benchmark also measures model calibration by evaluating whether models know what they know.
26.9%
Self-reported
LongBench v2
#21 / 24LongBench v2 is a benchmark designed to assess the ability of LLMs to handle long-context problems requiring deep understanding and reasoning across real-world multitasks. It consists of 503 challenging multiple-choice questions with contexts ranging from 8k to 2M words across six major task categories: single-document QA, multi-document QA, long in-context learning, long-dialogue history understanding, code repository understanding, and long structured data understanding.
15.0%
Verified
Aider-Polyglot
#10 / 22A coding benchmark that evaluates LLMs on 225 challenging Exercism programming exercises across C++, Go, Java, JavaScript, Python, and Rust. Models receive two attempts to solve each problem, with test error feedback provided after the first attempt if it fails. The benchmark measures both initial problem-solving ability and capacity to edit code based on error feedback, providing an end-to-end evaluation of code generation and editing capabilities across multiple programming languages.
61.9%
Self-reported
FACTS Grounding
#6 / 20A benchmark evaluating language models' ability to generate factually accurate and well-grounded responses based on long-form input context, comprising 1,719 examples with documents up to 32k tokens requiring detailed responses that are fully grounded in provided documents
85.3%
Self-reported
Global-MMLU-Lite
#4 / 16A lightweight version of Global MMLU benchmark that evaluates language models across multiple languages while addressing cultural and linguistic biases in multilingual evaluation.
88.4%
Self-reported
Aider-Polyglot Edit
#5 / 10A challenging multi-language coding benchmark that evaluates models' code editing abilities across C++, Go, Java, JavaScript, Python, and Rust. Contains 225 of Exercism's most difficult programming problems, selected as problems that were solved by 3 or fewer out of 7 top coding models. The benchmark focuses on code editing tasks and measures both correctness of solutions and proper edit format usage. Designed to re-calibrate evaluation scales so top models score between 5-50%.
56.7%
Self-reported
LiveCodeBench v5
#2 / 9LiveCodeBench is a holistic and contamination-free evaluation benchmark for large language models for code. It continuously collects new problems from programming contests (LeetCode, AtCoder, CodeForces) and evaluates four different scenarios: code generation, self-repair, code execution, and test output prediction. Problems are annotated with release dates to enable evaluation on unseen problems released after a model's training cutoff.
63.9%
Self-reported
Vibe-Eval
#3 / 8VIBE-Eval is a hard evaluation suite for measuring progress of multimodal language models, consisting of 269 visual understanding prompts with gold-standard responses authored by experts. The benchmark has dual objectives: vibe checking multimodal chat models for day-to-day tasks and rigorously testing frontier models, with the hard set containing >50% questions that all frontier models answer incorrectly.
65.4%
Self-reported
MRCR
#7 / 7MRCR (Multi-Round Coreference Resolution) is a synthetic long-context reasoning task where models must navigate long conversations to reproduce specific model outputs. It tests the ability to distinguish between similar requests and reason about ordering while maintaining attention across extended contexts.
32.0%
Self-reported
LongBench-V2 (short)
#4 / 615.0%
Unverified