GPT-5 Nano vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9B
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.5 9B 72, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 71, GPT-5 Nano 70). The right pick depends on what you value most.
OpenAIGPT-5 Nano
70/100- ECI139.4
- Price$0.05 / $0.40
- Context400K
GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
71/100- ECI133.9
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context1.05M
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 9B
72/100- ECI139.5
- Price$0.10 / $0.15
- Context262K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3.5 9B 72/100, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 71/100, GPT-5 Nano 70/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 9B for raw capability and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.5 9BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 9B 139.5 · GPT-5 Nano 139.4 · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 133.9
- Lowest priceQwen3.5 9BQwen3.5 9B $0.113 · GPT-5 Nano $0.138 · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · GPT-5 Nano 400,000 · Qwen3.5 9B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGPT-5 Nano: Text, Images · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen3.5 9B: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingQwen3.5 9BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GPT-5 Nano | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5 9B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 65 | 58 | 65 |
| Price | 25% | 91 | 86 | 95 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 70 | 100 | 80 |
| Context window | 10% | 44 | 61 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 70/100 | 71/100 | 72/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GPT-5 NanoOpenAI | Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle | Qwen3.5 9BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 139.4 | 133.9 | 139.5 (best) |
| ECI rank | #102 of 148 | #118 of 148 | #101 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 69.4% | — | 79.0% (best) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 20.0% | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 81.1% (best) | — | 61.7% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 11.7% | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.05 (best) | $0.10 | $0.10 |
| Output | $0.40 | $0.40 | $0.15 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.005 (best) | $0.01 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.138 | $0.175 | $0.113 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official OpenAI API | Official Google API | Median of 14 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 400,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | gpt-5-nano | gemini-2.5-flash-lite | — |
| API providers | 21 (best) | 20 | 15 |
| Released | Aug 7, 2025 | Jun 17, 2025 | Feb 23, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | May 30, 2024 | Jan 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GPT-5 Nano$1.30
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite$1.80
- Qwen3.5 9B$1.30
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-5 Nano, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5 9B?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3.5 9B 72/100, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 71/100, GPT-5 Nano 70/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 9B for raw capability and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Nano, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5 9B?
Qwen3.5 9B is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). GPT-5 Nano costs $0.05 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price); Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.113 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 9B versus $0.138 for GPT-5 Nano (1.2× as much) and $0.175 for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (1.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3.5 9B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 9B 139.5 (#101 of 148), GPT-5 Nano 139.4 (#102 of 148) and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 133.9 (#118 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (136.5–141.3 vs 134.9–141.7), so treat the gap as small.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-5 Nano, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 9B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 9B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 400,000 for GPT-5 Nano and 262,144 for Qwen3.5 9B. Maximum output per response: GPT-5 Nano up to 128,000, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite up to 65,536, Qwen3.5 9B up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-5 Nano accepts text and images; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen3.5 9B accepts text, images and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.5 9B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-5 Nano and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 9B is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. GPT-5 Nano came out Aug 7, 2025; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-5 Nano May 30, 2024, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Jan 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- GPT-5 Nano vs DeepSeek-V3.1DeepSeek · ECI 139.9
- GPT-5 Nano vs Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI · ECI 131.7
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI · ECI 131.7
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 136.2
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs GPT OSS 20BOpenAI · ECI 137.8
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs DeepSeek V3 0324DeepSeek · ECI 135.9
