GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning): The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) comparison will break down every critical metric to help you make the best decision.

Explore best-for scenarios•Let the AI Selector recommend next steps

Model Snapshot

Key decision metrics at a glance.

GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613)

OpenAI

Reasoning: 6
Coding: 6
Multimodal: 5
Long Context: 8
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.015
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: —

Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning)

Google

Reasoning: 7
Coding: 2
Multimodal: 2
Long Context: 3
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.001
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 298.945tokens/sec

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613)` vs `Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning)`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) debate, GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) scores 60 against Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning)'s 70. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613)300ms

Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning)300ms

Tokens per Second

GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613)36

Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning)298.945

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning)

Power is only one part of the equation. This GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) would cost $0.018, whereas Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) would cost $0.001. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) Battle for You?

Choose GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) if...

Cost is a secondary concern to power in your GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) decision.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Your use case demands cutting-edge AI performance.

Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) if...

You need a highly responsive model for user-facing applications.

Your budget is a primary consideration in the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) choice.

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (Reasoning) Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/