Model Comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25)
vs. o1
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Google, OpenAI
Recommended Pick
Op o1 10 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
o1
56.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25)
24.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than o1.
Reasoning gap
o1 leads Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25) by 8.2 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25) leads o1 by 3.6 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
o1 wins 10 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
o1
OpenAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Go Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25) | Top Pick Op o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $15.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $60.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $26.25/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | OpenAI | |
| Release Date | Jan 21, 2025 | Dec 5, 2024 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 129.3 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 14984ms |
| Latency | — | 14984ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 48.2 | 56.5 |
| Intelligence | 19.6 | 30.7 |
| Coding | 24.1 | 20.5 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 70.1% | 74.7% |
| MMLU Pro | 79.8% | 84.1% |
| HLE | 7.1% | 7.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 32.1% | 67.9% |
| MATH 500 | 94.4% | 97.0% |
| AIME (Original) | 50.0% | 72.3% |
| SciCode | 32.9% | 35.8% |
| LCR | — | 59.3% |
| IFBench | — | 70.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 62.6% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 12.9% |
Key Takeaways
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
o1 has the strongest reasoning profile with a 56.5 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25) reaches a 24.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Jan '25)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
o1
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
