Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs GPT-5.2
A side-by-side comparison of two multimodal models — real specs, pricing, strengths and weaknesses, and a clear verdict on which to choose. Kept current by our agents.
Quick verdict: which should you choose?
Choose Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview if you need
- ✓Higher intelligence index for complex reasoning tasks
- ✓Scalable document-level analysis with files, images, and text
- ✓Extensive 400k context window without lite efficiency trade-offs
- ✓Stable proprietary OpenAI model for unified multimodal processing
Choose GPT-5.2 if you need
- ✓Very high output speed of 310.24 t/s for rapid responses
- ✓Lowest price at $1.5 per 1M tokens and 1M token context
- ✓Native support for video, audio, and files in one model
- ✓Lightweight design optimized for speed and large media tasks
Verdict
GPT-5.2 leads in raw intelligence (46.6 vs 33.5) and unified document-level analysis for files, images, and text, while Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview dominates on speed (310.24 t/s), price ($1.5 vs $14 per 1M), context size (1M vs 400k tokens), and native video/audio support. GPT-5.2 suits depth-focused multimodal tasks; Gemini suits fast, large-scale, multi-modality workloads despite its preview limitations.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs GPT-5.2: side by side
| Spec | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview | GPT-5.2 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 33.5 | 46.6 | GPT-5.2 |
| Output speed | 310 t/s | — | Tie |
| Output price | $1.50/1M | $14.00/1M | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Context | 1049K | 400K | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview |
| Params | — | — | Tie |
| Type | Proprietary | Proprietary | Tie |
| Provider | OpenAI | Tie |
Detailed analysis
Intelligence
Winner: GPT-5.2GPT-5.2 scores 46.6 on the intelligence index compared to Gemini's 33.5. This gives GPT-5.2 an edge in complex multimodal reasoning. Gemini trades depth for efficiency as a lite preview model.
Speed & Pricing
Winner: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGemini delivers 310.24 t/s output speed at $1.5 per 1M tokens. GPT-5.2 costs $14 per 1M tokens with unknown speed. These metrics favor Gemini for high-volume, cost-sensitive use.
Context & Modalities
Winner: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGemini offers 1,048,576 token context and native video/audio/file handling. GPT-5.2 provides 400,000 token context limited to files, images, and text. Gemini supports broader multimodal inputs at larger scale.
Reliability
Winner: GPT-5.2GPT-5.2 has no noted preview inconsistencies. Gemini is a preview model that may show inconsistent behavior and trades depth for efficiency. Stable releases would be preferable for production reliability.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Pros
- +Broad native support for multiple modalities
- +Very large context window for document and media tasks
- +Lightweight design optimized for speed
- +Unified handling of video, audio and files
Cons
- –Preview model may show inconsistent behavior
- –Lite variant trades depth for efficiency
- –Experimental features can be less reliable than stable releases
GPT-5.2
Pros
- +Extensive context window
- +Support for files, images, and text
- +Unified multimodal processing
- +Scalable document-level analysis
Cons
- –High resource use with maximum context
- –No native audio or video modalities
- –Risk of diluted focus in very long inputs
Summary: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs GPT-5.2
Choose GPT-5.2 when intelligence and stable document analysis matter most. Select Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview for speed, cost, context size, and video/audio support. The facts clearly separate them by use-case priorities rather than declaring an overall winner.
Frequently asked questions
GPT-5.2 is better for intelligence and depth; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is better for speed, price, context, and modalities.