Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs Grok 4
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is the better pick for most users: it wins more benchmarks in our testing (4 vs 2), leads on safety calibration (5 vs 2) and structured output (5 vs 4), and is dramatically cheaper. Grok 4 is the choice when you need best-in-class long-context and classification (both rank tied 1st) and you can absorb much higher costs.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview
Benchmark Scores
External Benchmarks
Pricing
Input
$0.250/MTok
Output
$1.50/MTok
modelpicker.net
xai
Grok 4
Benchmark Scores
External Benchmarks
Pricing
Input
$3.00/MTok
Output
$15.00/MTok
modelpicker.net
Benchmark Analysis
Summary of our 12-test suite (scores from our testing):
- Gemini wins (our testing): structured_output 5 vs 4 (Gemini tied for 1st of 54; Grok rank 26 of 54). Practical impact: Gemini is more reliable at JSON/schema compliance when you need strict format adherence.
- Gemini wins: creative_problem_solving 4 vs 3 (rank 9 of 54 vs rank 30). This means Gemini produces more non-obvious, feasible ideas in our prompts.
- Gemini wins: safety_calibration 5 vs 2 (Gemini tied for 1st of 55; Grok rank 12). For moderation and refuse/allow decisions, Gemini is far better calibrated in our tests.
- Gemini wins: agentic_planning 4 vs 3 (Gemini rank 16 vs Grok rank 42). Gemini handled goal decomposition and failure-recovery more robustly in our scenarios.
- Grok wins: classification 4 vs 3 (Grok tied for 1st of 53; Gemini rank 31). For routing, tagging, and classification tasks Grok performed best in our benchmarks.
- Grok wins: long_context 5 vs 4 (Grok tied for 1st of 55; Gemini rank 38). In retrieval across 30K+ tokens, Grok retained higher retrieval accuracy in our tests.
- Ties (our testing): strategic_analysis (5/5), constrained_rewriting (4/4), tool_calling (4/4), faithfulness (5/5), persona_consistency (5/5), multilingual (5/5). These ties indicate parity for nuanced reasoning, strict compression tasks, function selection, sticking to sources, character consistency, and multilingual outputs. Context: rankings matter — Gemini’s top ranks are concentrated where format, safety, and creative solutions matter; Grok’s top ranks are concentrated on long-context retrieval and classification. Choose based on which capabilities matter to your workloads.
Pricing Analysis
Per the payload, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview costs $0.25 per m-token input and $1.50 per m-token output; Grok 4 costs $3 per m-token input and $15 per m-token output. Raw examples (combined input+output cost assuming a 50/50 split):
- 1M tokens/month: Gemini ≈ $0.88; Grok ≈ $9.00.
- 10M tokens/month: Gemini ≈ $8.75; Grok ≈ $90.00.
- 100M tokens/month: Gemini ≈ $87.50; Grok ≈ $900.00. If you count only outputs (e.g., heavy-generation workloads): 1M output tokens cost $1.50 on Gemini vs $15 on Grok. Enterprises, high-volume SaaS, and consumer apps at 10M+ tokens/month should care most about this gap — Grok’s per-token bill is roughly 10x higher in our data and drives substantial operating costs at scale.
Real-World Cost Comparison
Bottom Line
Choose Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview if you need low-cost AI at scale, strict structured outputs (JSON/schema), strong safety calibration, and better creative problem solving or agentic planning in our tests. Choose Grok 4 if your top priorities are maximum long-context retrieval accuracy and classification quality and you can accept ~10x higher per-token costs (Grok: $3/$15 in/out vs Gemini: $0.25/$1.50). Also factor context windows: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview has a 1,048,576-token window; Grok 4 has a 256,000-token window.
How We Test
We test every model against our 12-benchmark suite covering tool calling, agentic planning, creative problem solving, safety calibration, and more. Each test is scored 1–5 by an LLM judge. Read our full methodology.