Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite coding benchmark
Google · API model gemini-3.5-flash-lite · Results published 25 Oct 2026 · Benchmark v4
How Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite performed
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite by Google took the PomBench AI coding benchmark: every model gets the same prompt and writes self-contained browser code for a twelve-second scene: a Pomeranian runs across a backyard, jumps a puddle, enters its doghouse, retrieves a bone and turns toward the viewer. The video above is an independent offline browser recording of the code Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite returned, captured at 960 × 540 and 30 fps, with no organizer edits to the code.
In this Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite coding test the model produced 4,134 output tokens, including provider-reported reasoning (rank 35 of 46 by output tokens), and the known API cost was $0.0110 (rank 13 of 45, cheapest first). Is Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite good at coding? One task cannot answer that on its own, so this LLM coding benchmark lets you watch the result instead of reading a score: check the gait, the puddle jump and reflection, the doorway occlusion and whether the bone stays in the dog's mouth.
Then compare Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemini 3.8 Flash and Gemini 4 Argon below, or open the AI model comparison to play up to four models on one synchronized timeline.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemini 3.8 Flash, Gemini 4 Argon and Claude Opus 5
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemini 3.8 Flash: 4,134 vs 11,345 output tokens; known API cost $0.0110 vs $0.0441. Watch side by side
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemini 4 Argon: 4,134 vs 51,473 output tokens; known API cost $0.0110 vs $0.5770. Watch side by side
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Claude Opus 5: 4,134 vs 57,376 output tokens; known API cost $0.0110 vs $1.4689. Watch side by side
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite code
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wrote its own native browser animation code from the same prompt as every other model. One execution repair is available for empty, truncated or unexecutable code; the final response is kept, not a best-of selection.