Skip to main content

Head-to-head comparison

GPT-5.5 vs. Gemini 3.7 Flash

Compare published benchmark results from matching versions and cohorts, API pricing, and technical specifications. Any documented test setup differences remain visible.

shared result series
22
distinct benchmarks
22
latest retrieval
2026-09-04

Change model selection

Specifications

General specifications

Release date, availability, context window, architecture, and published parameter counts at a glance. Undisclosed details remain marked as unavailable.

Specifications for GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.7 Flash
AttributeGPT-5.5Gemini 3.7 Flash
ProviderOpenAIGoogle
ReleasedApr 23, 2026Aug 13, 2026
AvailabilityActiveActive
Model typeProprietaryProprietary
ParametersNot publishedNot published
ArchitectureNot publishedNot published
Context window1,050,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Knowledge cutoffDecember 1, 2025March 2026
Technical sourcesModelModel, Knowledge cutoff

Pricing

API pricing compared

The table compares official standard API rates per 1M tokens, including published cache pricing. Batch, fast, priority, regional surcharges, tool calls, and cloud platform pricing are excluded.

API pricing for GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.7 Flash
Price typeGPT-5.5Gemini 3.7 Flash
API input$5 ≤272K / $10 >272K$0.75
API output$30 ≤272K / $45 >272K$3.75
Cache read$0.5 ≤272K / $1 >272K$0.07
Cache write (5 min.)Not listedNot listed
Cache write (1 hr.)Not listedNot listed
Price verified07/30/2026 Source08/16/2026 Source
GPT-5.5Gemini 3.7 Flash
API inputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier
GPT-5.5$5
Gemini 3.7 FlashLower price$0.75
API outputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier
GPT-5.5$30
Gemini 3.7 FlashLower price$3.75
Cache readUSD per 1M tokens, base tier
GPT-5.5$0.5
Gemini 3.7 FlashLower price$0.075

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Pricing by provider

Direct developer pricing and provider endpoint tariffs routed through OpenRouter are listed separately. Prices are in USD per 1M tokens. Context-dependent direct tiers plus regional, Flex, Priority, and other OpenRouter tariffs remain individually identifiable.

Provider pricing for GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.7 Flash
ModelProviderPurchase route and tariffInput per 1M tokensOutput per 1M tokensSource
GPT-5.5OpenAIDirect from developerUp to 272,000 context tokens$5$30Source07/30/2026
OpenAIDirect from developerAbove 272,000 context tokens$10$45Source07/30/2026
Amazon BedrockVia OpenRouteramazon-bedrock/us-east-1$5.5$33Source09/12/2026
AzureVia OpenRouterazure$5$30Source09/12/2026
AzureVia OpenRouterazure/eu$5.5$33Source09/12/2026
AzureVia OpenRouterazure/us$5.5$33Source09/12/2026
OpenAIVia OpenRouteropenai$5$30Source09/12/2026
OpenAIVia OpenRouteropenai/fast$12.5$75Source09/12/2026
OpenAIVia OpenRouteropenai/flexLowest listed price: $2.5Lowest listed price: $15Source09/12/2026
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogleDirect from developerStandard API$0.75$3.75Source08/16/2026
GoogleVia OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global$0.75$3.75Source09/12/2026
GoogleVia OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global/flexLowest listed price: $0.375Lowest listed price: $1.875Source09/12/2026
GoogleVia OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global/priority$1.35$6.75Source09/12/2026
Google AI StudioVia OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio$0.75$3.75Source09/12/2026
Google AI StudioVia OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio/flexLowest listed price: $0.375Lowest listed price: $1.875Source09/12/2026
Google AI StudioVia OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio/priority$1.35$6.75Source09/12/2026

Performance

Shared benchmarks

Only published results with the same benchmark version, task, metric, and comparison cohort are paired. Different reasoning levels, agents, harnesses, or output limits appear directly in the table.

Capability profile from matched benchmarks

Each axis averages directly matched benchmark families. A value of 100 means the stronger value within this pair, not a universal quality score.

255075100CodingReasoningKnowledgeFinanceLegalAgentic tasksMultimodalHealth
GPT-5.5
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Coding: 99.1 / 75 (5 benchmark families)
Reasoning: 99.2 / 100 (1 benchmark family)
Knowledge: 97.8 / 100 (1 benchmark family)
Finance: 94.5 / 99.2 (4 benchmark families)
Legal: 80.7 / 95.2 (3 benchmark families)
Agentic tasks: 96.5 / 100 (2 benchmark families)
Multimodal: 99.2 / 100 (1 benchmark family)
Health: 96 / 98.3 (2 benchmark families)

22 matched rows from 22 benchmark families were considered. The radar shows 8 of 11 comparable categories.

GPT-5.5Gemini 3.7 Flash
Code MigrationOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.5Winner45.161 %
Gemini 3.7 Flash34.8 %
EMBOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.564.543 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner71.326 %
Finance Agent (v2)Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.551.76 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner59.042 %
GPQA DiamondOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.593.182 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner93.94 %
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkOverall · Task fully resolved. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.53.75 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner8.75 %
Legal Research BenchOverall · All-pass. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.5Winner40.385 %
Gemini 3.7 Flash34.615 %
LegalBenchOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.586.515 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner87.256 %
LiveCodeBench v6Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.585.296 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner88.652 %
MedCodeOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.549.1 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner53.39 %
MedScribeOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.5Winner86.868 %
Gemini 3.7 Flash83.942 %
MMLU-ProOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.588.144 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner90.121 %
MMMU-ProOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
GPT-5.588.266 %
Gemini 3.7 FlashWinner88.96 %

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Benchmark scores for GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.7 Flash
Benchmark and taskGPT-5.5Gemini 3.7 FlashSource
Code MigrationOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
Winner45.161 %
34.8 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
EMBOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
64.543 %
Winner71.326 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
Finance Agent (v2)Overall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
51.76 %
Winner59.042 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
GPQA DiamondOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
93.182 %
Winner93.94 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkOverall · Task fully resolved
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: task resolution rateScoring: Higher is better
3.75 %
Winner8.75 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
Legal Research BenchOverall · All-pass
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: all-pass rateScoring: Higher is better
Winner40.385 %
34.615 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
LegalBenchOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
86.515 %
Winner87.256 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
LiveCodeBench v6Overall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
85.296 %
Winner88.652 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
MedCodeOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
49.1 %
Winner53.39 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
MedScribeOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
Winner86.868 %
83.942 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
MMLU-ProOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
88.144 %
Winner90.121 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
MMMU-ProOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
88.266 %
Winner88.96 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
MortgageTaxOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
Winner68.76 %
66.654 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
ProgramBenchOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
Winner0.5 %
0 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
SAGEOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
Winner51.532 %
49.232 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
SkillsBenchOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterSettings: Harness: OpenHands
62.209 %
Winner65.891 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
SRE BenchOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
3.817 %
Winner4.58 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
SWE-bench VerifiedOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
Winner82.6 %
80.8 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
TaxEval v2Overall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
Winner74.98 %
74.734 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/01/2026
Terminal-Bench 2.1Overall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better
76.404 %
Winner77.528 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
Vals IndexOverall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: weighted index scoreScoring: Higher is better
57.411 %
Winner59.307 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Overall
Test details
No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterSettings: Harness: OpenHands
69.847 %
Winner70.395 %
Vals AI
Source details
Data as of: 09/03/2026

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Our model tests

Community tests you can inspect

Compare how the models respond to the same prompt. Each test shows the first attempt, with no subsequent fixes to the generated code. These results do not contribute to an overall score.

Pelican on a bicycle

A community classic for free-form SVG drawing.

GPT-5.5

The API response was not fully received. The model was not evaluated.

First attempt
Run date
7 Sept 2026
API provider
openrouter
Requested API model
openai/gpt-5.5
Pinned endpoint
OpenAI | openai/gpt-5.5-20260423
Reasoning setting
high
Temperature
Provider default
Token limit including reasoning
8,192 tokens
Test protocol
community-visual-tests-v1
Technical checks
Failed

Not yet visually reviewed. A successful recording does not confirm correct physics or full compliance with the prompt.

Gemini 3.7 Flash

API access was unavailable for this run. The model was not evaluated.

First attempt
Run date
7 Sept 2026
API provider
openrouter
Requested API model
google/gemini-3.7-flash
Pinned endpoint
Google AI Studio | google/gemini-3.7-flash-20260813
Reasoning setting
high
Temperature
Provider default
Token limit including reasoning
8,192 tokens
Test protocol
community-visual-tests-v1
Technical checks
Not run

Not yet visually reviewed. A successful recording does not confirm correct physics or full compliance with the prompt.

Prompt and test conditions

Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle

Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens

Task origin (Simon Willison)

How to read this comparison

Winning one benchmark is not an overall verdict

Your workload, budget, and required context length matter most. A coding benchmark says little about visual understanding or agent performance.

The standard price table uses direct developer rates. The provider comparison labels OpenRouter endpoints, regions, and special tariffs separately.

Every result links to its measurement source and retrieval date. Labels distinguish vendor reports, official benchmark leaderboards, and independent evaluations. Disputed or archived results are excluded.

More matchups

Related LLM comparisons

Compare GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.7 Flash with other leading models using the same data and benchmark logic.

View the complete LLM comparison