BenchLeader

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Reasoning effort

Gemini 3.8 Flash is a Google proprietary reasoning model, released 2 Sept 2026. Its best configuration (high reasoning effort) ranks #48 of 775 on the BenchLeader Index at 64.5 ±3.9, in the upper half. The ± is the point: 125 other configurations score within that range, so they and this one cannot be told apart on quality alone — price and speed are what separate them. It scores highest in composite (75) and lowest in agents & tools (51). At $1.50 per million tokens blended it is pricier than most ranked models. Output speed of 144 tokens per second puts it faster than most, with a first answer in 26.2 s. It has been measured at 4 reasoning-effort settings; this summary describes the best-scoring one, and the tabs above switch between them. Last measured 19 Oct 2026.

Blended price
$1.50/M
$0.750 in · $3.75 out
Output speed
144 tok/s
measured by Artificial Analysis
First answer
26 s
first token 2.50 s
Context
1.0M
Full answer
30 s
median, reasoning included
Cost per run
$1.24
one full Intelligence Index run
Released
2 Sept 2026
How it scores by categoryDashed line = average model (50). One step of 15 = one standard deviation.
  1. Overall index65
  2. Reasoning68
  3. Coding64
  4. Agents & tools51
  5. Maths63
  6. Knowledge68
  7. Human preference70
  8. Multimodal68
  9. Long context66
  10. Composite75

Versions

Google has shipped 12 models under this name. Each is ranked on its own results; a newer version often has fewer results so far, which holds its index nearer the average until more arrive.

ModelReleasedIndexRank
Gemini 3.8 Flashhighthis page2 Sept 202664.5#48
Gemini 3.7 Flashhigh13 Aug 202663.5#61
Gemini 3.6 Flashhigh21 Jul 202662.1#89
Gemini 3.5 Flashhigh19 May 202663.2#68
Gemini 3 Flashthinking17 Dec 202559.2#134
Gemini 2.5 Flash 09 2025thinking25 Sept 202551.1#348
Gemini 2.5 Flash17 Apr 202552.7#302
Gemini 2.0 Flash5 Feb 202543.3#560
Gemini 1.5 Flash 00224 Sept 202440.2#650
Gemini 1.5 Flash 00123 May 202437.2#726
Gemini 1.5 Flash14 May 2024––
Gemini Flash 2.0–––

Reasoning-effort configurations

The same model behaves differently depending on how much it is allowed to think. Each row is one setting, scored only on the benchmarks that were run at that setting. “Not stated” collects results from publishers that did not say which setting they used; for a reasoning model that is usually its thinking mode, but we do not assume it. Pick a setting here or at the top of the page to see its price, speed and category scores.

EffortIndexRankSpeedFirst answerChat reply costCategories
low61.1#10277 tok/s2.50 s$0.0014Agents & tools 62 · Coding 61 · Composite 67 · Knowledge 71 · Long context 65 · Multimodal 68 · Reasoning 57
medium64.5#4977 tok/s2.50 s$0.0014Agents & tools 75 · Coding 58 · Composite 74 · Knowledge 74 · Long context 67 · Multimodal 67 · Reasoning 63
highbest64.5#48144 tok/s26 s$0.0014Agents & tools 51 · Coding 64 · Composite 75 · Human preference 70 · Knowledge 68 · Long context 66 · Maths 63 · Multimodal 68 · Reasoning 68
not stated55.6#22377 tok/s2.50 s$0.0014Agents & tools 53 · Composite 49 · Knowledge 58 · Maths 53 · Reasoning 75

How its index has moved

8 Sept 2026 to 21 Oct 2026
526170
  • medium
  • high
  • low
  • not stated

The index is recomputed from scratch every day, so a line moves when a new benchmark result lands, when a publisher revises a score, or when the models it is normalised against change. Early movement usually means the score is still settling.

Benchmark results

See all LLM benchmarks. One column per reasoning effort. Rank is among every configuration of every model on that benchmark. Hover a score for the run it came from.

Reasoning

Benchmarklowmediumhighnot statedSourceTrend
GPQA Diamond––95.4%#4–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
Humanity's Last Exameffort not stated–––44.5%#5Scale AI / CAIS
Arena Hard Prompts––1518#10–Arena (LMArena)
LiveBench 2.0 Reasoningnot in indexeffort not stated–––89.3%#17LiveBench
LiveBench 1.0 Reasoningnot in index––89.3%#18–LiveBench
GPQA Diamond (AA)not in index92.0%#4193.5%#1495.3%#3–Artificial Analysis
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)not in index37.1%#10642.1%#7347.8%#37–Artificial Analysis
GPQA Diamond (Vals)not in index––94.4%#4–Vals AI
ARC-AGI-190.5%#6897.5%#1298.5%#1–ARC Prize
ARC-AGI-277.5%#4282.9%#3889.2%#18–ARC Prize
ARC-AGI-315.1%#1924.2%#1735.0%#15–ARC Prize
CritPt4.0%#16512.3%#10618.3%#69–Artificial Analysis
MysteryMechanismnot in index––36.5%#8–Vals AI
Chess Puzzlesnot in index––58.0%#14–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
Mystery Game Puzzlesnot in index––47.0%#14–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
LMCAnot in index51.2%#6152.9%#51–51.5%#58Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
DTBenchnot in index94.9%#4694.9%#46–95.7%#37Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub

Coding

Benchmarklowmediumhighnot statedSourceTrend
SciCode55.0%#5255.1%#5056.6%#35–SciCode
WeirdML––84.8%#15–WeirdML
FrontierCode–41.2%#25––Cognition
Arena Coding––1528#26–Arena (LMArena)
Arena WebDev––1585#32–Arena (LMArena)
LiveBench 2.0 Codingnot in indexeffort not stated–––82.2%#28LiveBench
LiveBench 1.0 Codingnot in index––72.5%#57–LiveBench
SciCode (AA)not in index55.0%#5455.1%#5256.6%#35–Artificial Analysis
LiveCodeBench––89.5%#3–Vals AI
IOI––56.9%#18–Vals AI
SWE-bench (Vals)not in index––80.0%#24–Vals AI
Code Migrationnot in index––36.5%#35–Vals AI
ProgramBenchnot in index––1.0%#15–Vals AI
Vibe Code Bench 1-100not in index––18.8%#13–Vals AI
Vibe Code Bench v1.1not in index––78.7%#28–Vals AI
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAnot in indexeffort not stated–––47.0%#6Scale AI SEAL
SWE Atlas: Refactoringnot in indexeffort not stated–––44.8%#7Scale AI SEAL
SWE Atlas: Test Writingnot in indexeffort not stated–––53.7%#4Scale AI SEAL
Surface Evolver Benchnot in index––76.9%#9–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
DeepSWE v1.1not in index–71.0%#1073.8%#2–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
CursorBenchnot in index–37.3%#4539.6%#40–Cursor
ALE-Benchnot in index––1269.7#36–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
FrontierSWEnot in index––19.6%#16–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)not in index10.1%#8719.7%#6319.7%#63–Artificial Analysis
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)not in index83.2%#3683.9%#3487.6%#18–Artificial Analysis
Startrise Frontendnot in indexeffort not stated–––64.6%#26Startrise
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)not in index––36.4%#31–Artificial Analysis

Agents & tools

Benchmarklowmediumhighnot statedSourceTrend
Terminal-Bench––19.1%#72–Terminal-Bench
Remote Labor Indexeffort not stated–––5.8%#7Scale AI / CAIS
APEX-Agentseffort not stated–––64.3%#9Mercor
Arena Agent––3.7#13–Arena (LMArena)
LiveBench Long Agenticnot in indexeffort not stated–––30.1%#31LiveBench
LiveBench Browsernot in indexeffort not stated–––64.0%#25LiveBench
LiveBench Agentic Codingnot in index––54.2%#33–LiveBench
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)––81.3%#8–Vals AI
HiL-Bencheffort not stated–––41.5%#16Scale AI SEAL
GDPval-AA v2.1not in index40.4%#10146.1%#7046.8%#65–Artificial Analysis
τ³-Banking (AA)33.2%#5645.8%#1245.0%#15–Artificial Analysis
ITBench SRE (AA)not in index––52.5%#3–Artificial Analysis
Analyst Agent (AA)not in index––46.3%#15–Artificial Analysis
CUA-benchnot in index––4.2%#9–Vals AI
CyberBenchnot in index––43.8%#40–Vals AI
Finance Agent v2not in index––61.4%#2–Vals AI
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmarknot in index––12.1%#11–Vals AI
Legal Research Benchnot in index––38.9%#32–Vals AI
SkillsBenchnot in index––58.0%#12–Vals AI
SREBenchnot in index––11.1%#13–Vals AI
Tax Agent Benchnot in index––32.1%#19–Vals AI
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)not in index––19.7%#28–Vals AI
Terminal-Bench Sciencenot in index––8.6%#19–Vals AI
Time Horizon Index: KSPnot in index––18.8%#6–Vals AI
Vending-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated–––5093.8#31Andon Labs
AutomationBenchnot in index36.5%#10160.9%#3259.9%#36–Artificial Analysis
GDP.pdf (AA)not in index18.6%#7022.8%#4421.0%#55–Artificial Analysis
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1not in index––0.0%#23–Harvey
AA-Briefcase v1.1not in index––1203#47–Artificial Analysis
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)not in index––10.0%#26–Artificial Analysis
CWE-Bench (AA)––52.5%#11–Artificial Analysis
DeepSec-Bench (AA)––14.5%#14–Artificial Analysis
CyberGym end-to-end (AA)––8.4%#13–Artificial Analysis
FACTS Searchnot in indexeffort not stated–––76.3%#17Google

Knowledge

Benchmarklowmediumhighnot statedSourceTrend
SimpleQA Verified––69.7%#8–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysisnot in indexeffort not stated–––54.0%#45LiveBench
LiveBench Researchnot in indexeffort not stated–––79.1%#19LiveBench
LiveBench 1.0 Data Analysisnot in index––54.0%#64–LiveBench
AA-Omniscience21.4#6028.6#3729.6#34–Artificial Analysis
MMLU-Pro––90.2%#5–Vals AI
LegalBench––87.0%#8–Vals AI
TaxEval––74.5%#35–Vals AI
PRBench Financeeffort not stated–––49.5%#12Scale AI SEAL
PRBench Legaleffort not stated–––48.9%#15Scale AI SEAL
BioMysteryBenchnot in index––62.2%#22–Vals AI
Excel Modeling Benchmarknot in index––72.2%#8–Vals AI
MedCodenot in index––48.1%#31–Vals AI
MedScribenot in index––84.5%#34–Vals AI
Public Benefits Benchnot in index––65.3%#21–Vals AI
GDP.pdfnot in index–23.4%#2223.2%#23–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
AA-Omniscience: accuracynot in index52.2%#5253.0%#5054.6%#40–Artificial Analysis
AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationnot in index35.4%#18648.1%#12944.8%#143–Artificial Analysis

Instruction following

BenchmarkhighSourceTrend
LiveBench Languagenot in index87.8%#7LiveBench
LiveBench Instruction Followingnot in index81.4%#1LiveBench
Arena Instruction Followingnot in index1490#14Arena (LMArena)

Human preference

Multimodal

Benchmarklowmediumhighnot statedSourceTrend
Arena Vision––1315#7–Arena (LMArena)
LiveBench Designnot in indexeffort not stated–––72.7%#34LiveBench
MMMU-Pro84.5%#1984.2%#2185.6%#9–Artificial Analysis
MMMU-Pro (Vals)not in index––89.1%#4–Vals AI
MortgageTaxnot in index––65.3%#43–Vals AI
SAGEnot in index––35.1%#67–Vals AI
AudioMCnot in index––60.4%#1–Scale AI SEAL
AudioMC (text output)not in index––60.4%#1–Scale AI SEAL
Blueprint-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated–––38.6%#6Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
AA-3Dnot in index––969#14–Artificial Analysis

Long context

BenchmarklowmediumhighSourceTrend
AA-LCR80.7%#6484.0%#1181.3%#55Artificial Analysis
MLCRnot in index––21.7%#25Artificial Analysis

Composite

Benchmarklowmediumhighnot statedSourceTrend
Epoch Capabilities Indexnot in indexeffort not stated–––157.4#20Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
LiveBench 2.0effort not stated–––67.3%#28LiveBench
LiveBench 1.0not in index––75.8%#34–LiveBench
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.233.5#10739.8#6540.9#59–Artificial Analysis
Vals Indexnot in index––56.0#13–Vals AI
AA Cyber Indexnot in index––25.1#14–Artificial Analysis

Where it wins

Benchmarks where this configuration ranks in the top five of every configuration measured.

Where to run it

Every provider serving this model through OpenRouter, with throughput and first-token latency measured on live traffic over the last 30 minutes and each provider’s own price. Purple marks the best in each column.

ProviderSpeedFirst tokenInput $/MOutput $/MContextQuantisation
Google Vertex116 tok/s3.66 s$0.825$4.131.0M–
Google Vertex102 tok/s2.75 s$1.35$6.751.0M–
Google AI Studio94 tok/s2.24 s$0.750$3.751.0M–
Google AI Studio82 tok/s2.25 s$0.375$1.881.0M–
Google Vertex81 tok/s2.28 s$0.750$3.751.0M–
Google AI Studio76 tok/s3.10 s$1.35$6.751.0M–
Google Vertex48 tok/s13 s$0.375$1.881.0M–

What a task costs

Estimates from list price, output speed and time to first answer for the best configuration. “With caching” assumes three-quarters of the input is served from the prompt cache at $0.075 per 1M. Reasoning tokens are not modelled.

WorkloadTokens in / outCostWith cachingTime
Chat reply400 / 300$0.0014$0.001228.3 s
Summarize a 30-page report12,000 / 600$0.011$0.005230.4 s
Code edit6,000 / 1,500$0.010$0.007136.6 s
Agentic coding session60,000 / 4,000$0.060$0.03054.0 s
Structured extraction2,000 / 200$0.0023$0.001227.6 s

More from Google

New this month

Compare Gemini 3.8 Flash with…

See also

Data as of 21 Oct 2026. Compare these configurations.

Cite as: BenchLeader, “Gemini 3.8 Flash: benchmarks, pricing, speed and rank”, https://www.benchleader.com/models/gemini-3-8-flash, data as of 21 Oct 2026.