whatmodel.sh / Gemini 1.5 Flash (001)

Gemini 1.5 Flash (001) is a closed-weights language model from Google, released May 2024. Licence: proprietary.

Catalogue identity notes

Comparison model from the Epoch AI internal-evaluation CSVs (Epoch release date 2024-05-23). Stable API version gemini-1.5-flash-001 (May 2024); distinct from -002. Gemini API changelog, September 29, 2025: Gemini 1.5 models shut down.

50.2±0.7comparison only: no current run option verifiedfrom 26 benchmark results across 9 sources

$ how it compares

The LLMs ranked either side of Gemini 1.5 Flash (001), out of 828 with a score, then more from Google.

#modelscorewhereRAMreleased
405CodeQwen1.5 7B Chat Alibaba50±1local~6.4GB2024-04
406Jamba 1.5 Large AI21 Labs50±1local~839GB2024-08
407Gemini 1.5 Flash (001) Google50±1comparison only2024-05
408Llama-3-8B-ProLong-512k-Instruct Princeton NLP50±5local~35GB2024-08
409EXAONE Deep 2.4B LG AI Research50±2local~3.2GB2025-03
more from Google
9Gemini 4 Argon (limited preview) Google82±1limited preview2026-09
23Gemini 3.8 Flash Google77±1api $1.50/M2026-09
32Gemini 3.7 Flash Google76±1api $1.50/M2026-08

see all LLMs · find the ones that fit your machine

$ what it's good at

coding▁▁▁▃▅▇█▇▅▄▃▁ #284 of 524 * · 15% of its score · 2 tests

Beats Qwen3-VL 32B Instruct, Solar Open 100B (102B-A12B), GLM-4.7-Flash here, though they rank higher overall. Trails QwQ-32B-Preview, InternLM2.5 20B Chat, Mistral Small Instruct 22B (2409) here, though they rank lower overall.

testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
CRUXEval (ZeroEval, 800 problems)63.7% ✎▁▂▆▃▆█▆▃▂·▁▁ beats 22/47medium · avg 61%▇▇▇▇▇ 13%sharp · at its level
WebApp1K-React pass@1 (onekq-ai)57.0% ✎▃▁▁█▁▄▅▃▄▇▁▄ beats 13/31medium · avg 44%▇ 2.3%sharp · at its level · noisy
chat & writing▁▁▁▃▅▄▆█▇▇▇▃ #279 of 463 * · 4.7% of its score · 1 test

Beats Mistral Small 4 (119B-A6.5B), Ministral 3 14B Reasoning 2512, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Flan-T5 XXL, Granite 4.0 H 1B, LFM2.5 1.2B Instruct here, though they rank lower overall.

testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
LMArena (text)1286.5 ✎▁▁▁▂▃▃▃▆▆▇█▃ beats 115/379avg 1268▇▇ 4.7%blunt
math▁▂▃▅▇▅▅█▄▁▁▁ #346 of 462 · 24% of its score · 4 tests

Beats GPT-4 (0613), Athene-70B here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Gemma 7B (base), DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B, CodeGemma 7B (v1.0) here, though they rank lower overall.

testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
MATH level 525.1% ✎▂▂▅▆▄█▆▃▅▂▃▄ beats 23/92hard · avg 32%▇▇▇▇ 11%sharp · at its level
MATH Level 5 (ZeroEval, 721 problems)34.8% ✎▁▁▁▆█▃▇▇▄··▂ beats 17/38hard · avg 34%▇▇▇ 6.5%sharp · at its level
GSM8K (ZeroEval, zero-shot)91.4% ✎▁▄·▁▄█▅▅▅███ beats 23/43very easy · avg 89%▇▇ 5.4%sharp
OTIS mock AIME 2024–20253.9% ✎▃▃▄▃▃▃▇▇█▃▂▅ beats 26/193very hard · avg 8.5%▇ 1.6%sharp · noisy
vision & documents▁▁▃▃▃▃▅▄▇▇█▃ #149 of 182 · 12% of its score · 4 tests

Beats DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp), Gemma 3 12B here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Qwen3.5 2B, Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct here, though they rank lower overall.

testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
Arena vision (style controlled)1059.5 ✎▁▁▂▂▂▃▄▅▅▆██ beats 22/145avg 1068▇ 3.2%blunt
CharXiv (reasoning questions)33.9% ✎▂▂▂█▃▂·▂▂··▂ beats 8/13medium · avg 36%▇ 3.1%at its level
MMMU val (VHELM, zero-shot exact match)56.6% ✎▄▄··▄▄█··▄▄█ beats 5/9medium · avg 51%▇ 3.1%at its level
MathVista testmini (VHELM, zero-shot exact match)51.2% ✎▃·▅···▃▃▃·▃█ beats 5/9medium · avg 43%▇ 2.6%at its level
other tests15 not in a task · 44% of its score
testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
MMLU-Redux (ZeroEval, 2,778 questions)77.4% ✎▁·▁▁▄▄▄▅█▄▂▁ beats 24/53easy · avg 77%▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 21%at its level
ZebraLogic (ZeroEval, 1,000 puzzles)19.4% ✎▁▁▃▆██▁▁·▁▁▁ beats 29/57hard · avg 18%▇▇▇ 7.2%sharp
GPQA Diamond40.4% ✎▁▁▁▁▂▄▆▄▅▇█▅ beats 38/208hard · avg 40%▇▇ 5.6%sharp
AHELM Speech Robust Bench (LibriSpeech-clean with noise) transcription WER49.8% ✎▂·█··▆▄·▂▂·▄ beats 1/13avg 33%▇▇ 4.4%typical
AHELM CoRe-Bench conversational audio reasoning (pseudo-exact match)72.2% ✎▂·▄··▂▂·▄▃█▄ beats 7/13medium · avg 53%▇ 1.6%at its level
Open PT-LLM Leaderboard average (9 Portuguese tasks)79.3% ✎▃▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂█▅▁ beats 254/276medium · avg 73%▇ 1.0%at its level · noisy
AHELM LibriSpeech transcription by audio LLMs (WER)34.2% ✎▃···▃·█▃▅▃▅█ beats 0/13avg 11%▇ 0.9%blunt
AHELM MUStARD audio sarcasm detection (exact match)55.5% ✎▂·······▆█▆▆ beats 1/13very hard · avg 57%▇ 0.6%blunt
7 more tests
testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
AHELM VoxCeleb2 same-speaker detection (exact match)52.2% ✎▂·▂·▃█▂▄▄··▄ beats 2/13very hard · avg 54%▇ 0.6%sharp · too hard for it · noisy
AHELM AIR-Bench Foundation music subsets (exact match)48.3% ✎▃█▃▅▃·▃·▃▅▃▃ beats 0/13medium · avg 57%▇ 0.4%blunt · at its level
Vectara hallucination leaderboard, 2025 dataset (HHEM-2.3, factual consistency rate)93.4% ✎▁▁▂▃▄▄█▆▃▂▂▁ beats 46/140very easy · avg 94%▇ 0.3%blunt · maxed out · noisy
AHELM MELD audio emotion classification (pseudo-exact match)47.1% ✎▃··▃▃▃·▃▅▅█▅ beats 9/13medium · avg 40%▇ 0.2%blunt · at its level
AHELM FLEURS 7-language transcription by audio LLMs (WER)72.3% ✎▄▂···▂▆▂█▂·▂ beats 4/13avg 80%▇ 0.1%blunt · noisy
AHELM Multilingual LibriSpeech 7-language transcription by audio LLMs (WER)8.8% ✎▂▂▂··▂▂·▂▃█▆ beats 6/13avg 13%▇ 0.0%blunt · noisy
AHELM VocalSound human-sound recognition (prefix exact match)46.3% ✎██▄▄·█·█·█▄▄ beats 1/13easy · avg 67%▇ 0.0%blunt · at its level · noisy

$ where to run it

No verified API or download recorded yet · add one

$ how the score was worked out · WildEval ZeroEval published r… 53%, Epoch AI — internal evaluatio… 18%, AHELM: A Holistic Evaluation… 9% and 6 more

Each result implies a score on its own, after adjusting for how hard its test is and who ran it. The score is their weighted average, with a small pull toward the middle for thinly tested models. Each test's weight is its counts column above; here it's added up by who ran the tests. How it works

$ improve this page

Use a short GitHub form or edit the data through a pull request. Every number needs a source; here's which ones we can use.

data updated · sources and licences · json