ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 71 to 58 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Meta

    Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct

    Released Apr 5, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI132.2
    • Price$0.321 / $0.91
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    71/100
    • ECI133.9
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct (58). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 133.9 · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 132.2
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite $0.175 · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct $0.468 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteLlama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct: Text, Images · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5658
Price25%6686
Inputs & features15%50100
Context window10%6061
Overall100%58/10071/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructMetaGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)132.2133.9 (best)
ECI rank#122 of 148#118 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions67.0%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics20.6%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.321$0.10 (best)
Output$0.91$0.40 (best)
Cached input—$0.01
Blended (3:1)$0.468$0.175 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 6 providersOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model ID—gemini-2.5-flash-lite
API providers620 (best)
ReleasedApr 5, 2025Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoffAug 2024Jan 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct$5.03
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite$1.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct (58). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct costs $0.321 input / $0.91 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.175 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite versus $0.468 for Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct (2.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 133.9 (#118 of 148) and Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 132.2 (#122 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (129.8–136.3 vs 128.0–134.1), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both 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 1,000,000 for Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct. Maximum output per response: Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct up to 16,384, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct accepts text and images; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct came out Apr 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct Aug 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons