Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs o4 Mini
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Gemini 2.5 Pro wins on 15/24 benchmarks
Gemini 2.5 Pro wins 15 of 24 shared benchmarks. Leads in coding · knowledge.
Category leads
coding·Gemini 2.5 Proreasoning·o4 Miniknowledge·Gemini 2.5 Promath·o4 Minilanguage·o4 Mini
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Gemini 2.5 Pro
#61 by perf·no signal
o4 Mini
#81 by perf·#13 by attention
Best value
o4 Mini
1.9x better value than Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro
10.0 pts/$
$5.63/M
o4 Mini
19.3 pts/$
$2.75/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Google DeepMind
$4.00T·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
24 benchmarks · 2 models
Gemini 2.5 Proo4 Mini
Aider polyglot
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +11.1
Aider Polyglot · measures how well AI models can edit code across multiple programming languages using the Aider coding assistant framework.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
83.1
o4 Mini
72.0
ARC-AGI
o4 Mini leads by +17.7
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
41.0
o4 Mini
58.7
ARC-AGI-2
o4 Mini leads by +1.3
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
4.9
o4 Mini
6.1
CadEval
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +2.0
CadEval · evaluates the ability to generate and reason about Computer-Aided Design code, testing spatial reasoning and engineering knowledge.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
64.0
o4 Mini
62.0
Chess Puzzles
o4 Mini leads by +6.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
20.0
o4 Mini
26.0
Fiction.LiveBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +13.9
Fiction.LiveBench · a continuously updated benchmark using recently published fiction to test reading comprehension and reasoning, preventing data contamination.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
91.7
o4 Mini
77.8
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
o4 Mini leads by +10.7
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
14.1
o4 Mini
24.8
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
o4 Mini leads by +2.1
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
4.2
o4 Mini
6.3
GeoBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +17.0
GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
81.0
o4 Mini
64.0
GPQA diamond
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +7.6
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
80.4
o4 Mini
72.8
GSO-Bench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +0.3
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
3.9
o4 Mini
3.6
HELM · GPQA
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +1.4
Gemini 2.5 Pro
74.9
o4 Mini
73.5
HELM · IFEval
o4 Mini leads by +8.9
Gemini 2.5 Pro
84.0
o4 Mini
92.9
HELM · MMLU-Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +4.3
Gemini 2.5 Pro
86.3
o4 Mini
82.0
HELM · Omni-MATH
o4 Mini leads by +30.4
Gemini 2.5 Pro
41.6
o4 Mini
72.0
HELM · WildBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +0.3
Gemini 2.5 Pro
85.7
o4 Mini
85.4
HLE
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +3.7
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
17.7
o4 Mini
13.9
Lech Mazur Writing
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +11.0
Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
86.0
o4 Mini
75.0
MATH level 5
o4 Mini leads by +2.3
MATH Level 5 · the hardest tier of the MATH benchmark, featuring competition-level problems from AMC, AIME, and Olympiad-style mathematics.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
95.6
o4 Mini
97.8
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +3.1
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
84.7
o4 Mini
81.7
SimpleBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +28.4
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
54.9
o4 Mini
26.4
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +32.1
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
56.0
o4 Mini
23.9
VPCT
o4 Mini leads by +16.6
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
19.6
o4 Mini
36.3
WeirdML
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +1.5
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
54.0
o4 Mini
52.6
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | o4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
Aider polyglot Aider Polyglot · measures how well AI models can edit code across multiple programming languages using the Aider coding assistant framework. | 83.1 | 72.0 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 41.0 | 58.7 |
ARC-AGI-2 ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data. | 4.9 | 6.1 |
CadEval CadEval · evaluates the ability to generate and reason about Computer-Aided Design code, testing spatial reasoning and engineering knowledge. | 64.0 | 62.0 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 20.0 | 26.0 |
Fiction.LiveBench Fiction.LiveBench · a continuously updated benchmark using recently published fiction to test reading comprehension and reasoning, preventing data contamination. | 91.7 | 77.8 |
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 14.1 | 24.8 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 4.2 | 6.3 |
GeoBench GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding. | 81.0 | 64.0 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 80.4 | 72.8 |
GSO-Bench GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues. | 3.9 | 3.6 |
HELM · GPQA | 74.9 | 73.5 |
HELM · IFEval | 84.0 | 92.9 |
HELM · MMLU-Pro | 86.3 | 82.0 |
HELM · Omni-MATH | 41.6 | 72.0 |
HELM · WildBench | 85.7 | 85.4 |
HLE HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%. | 17.7 | 13.9 |
Lech Mazur Writing Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication. | 86.0 | 75.0 |
MATH level 5 MATH Level 5 · the hardest tier of the MATH benchmark, featuring competition-level problems from AMC, AIME, and Olympiad-style mathematics. | 95.6 | 97.8 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 84.7 | 81.7 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 54.9 | 26.4 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 56.0 | 23.9 |
VPCT VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations. | 19.6 | 36.3 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 54.0 | 52.6 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $1.25 | $10.00 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $34.38 | |
| $1.10 | $4.40 | 200K tokens (~100 books) | $19.25 |