Side-by-side technical and economic comparison between Google's Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and OpenAI's GPT-5.6 Mini.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.6 Mini | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provider Organization | OpenAI | — | |
| Standard Input / 1M | $0.10 | $0.30 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (67% lower) |
| Cached Input / 1M | $0.01 | $0.03 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite lower |
| Output / 1M | $0.40 | $1.20 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite lower |
| Context Window | 1.05M | 400k | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (1.05M) |
| Max Generation Tokens | 8.2k | 16.4k | GPT-5.6 Mini |
| Tokenizer Family | Google Gemini SentencePiece (256k vocabulary) | OpenAI o200k_base (200k vocabulary) | — |
Opt for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite when your engineering requirements prioritize Google's ecosystem, specific tokenizer efficiencies (Calibrated Gemini Tokenizer (±4%)), or when your expected prompt-to-completion ratios favor its $0.1/M input rate.
Opt for GPT-5.6 Mini when looking for OpenAI's tooling integration, specific context window depth (400k tokens), or when output generation volume favors its $1.2/M rate.