Gemini 3.7 Flash

Made by Google DeepMind, released 13 Aug 2026. Epoch AI lists its access as “API access”. Appears strongest at coding, knowledge and writing among the models listed here.

Find my AI Compare with another model

In short

What it does well

  • Coding: Top tier (20th of 77 listed models)
  • Knowledge: Top tier (9th of 43 listed models)
  • Writing: Top tier (9th of 77 listed models)
  • Maths: Strong (20th of 43 listed models)

Where it falls short

The four main ratings show no weakness. That is not evidence it has none.

What we don't know yet

  • Fixing real software bugs: Not enough data

The four ratings

  • Top tier
  • Strong
  • Middle
  • Behind the leaders
  • Not enough data

Ratings compare only the 77 models listed here, in quarters, best first. “Not enough data” means no result yet. It is never a low score.

Writing
Top tierHow often people preferred its answers to writing prompts. 1,487 on Arena's scale · Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash writing score (lmarena)
Coding
Top tierHow often people preferred its answers to coding questions. 1,500 on Arena's scale · Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash coding score (lmarena)
Maths
StrongHow many very hard maths problems it solved. 71.6% · Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash maths score (epoch)
Knowledge
Top tierHow many short factual questions it answered correctly. 69.2% · Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash knowledge score (epoch)

Evidence completeness: Broad evidence, 12 of 13 tests have a result.

Where it is relatively stronger or weaker

This compares each kind of request with the model's own overall position among the 77 listed models, using Arena's votes. It is about performance on different languages, kinds of request and topics, not about political or social bias.

Relatively stronger

No category stands out as clearly stronger than its overall position.

Relatively weaker

No category stands out as clearly weaker than its overall position.

Show every category we can see
Position in each Arena category
CategoryPositionArena scoreVotesSource
Expert-level prompts
Kind of request
14th of 771,514
95% range 1,504 to 1,524
3,683Source for Expert-level prompts
Hard prompts
Kind of request
12th of 771,497
95% range 1,492 to 1,503
20,996Source for Hard prompts
Long prompts
Kind of request
12th of 771,494
95% range 1,488 to 1,500
14,825Source for Long prompts
Longer conversations
Kind of request
15th of 771,485
95% range 1,476 to 1,494
4,935Source for Longer conversations
Chinese
Language
5th of 761,554
95% range 1,541 to 1,566
2,547Source for Chinese
English prompts
Language
13th of 771,485
95% range 1,479 to 1,491
12,850Source for English prompts
French
Language
16th of 721,495
95% range 1,476 to 1,515
1,044Source for French
German
Language
3rd of 551,515
95% range 1,488 to 1,542
491Source for German
Japanese
Language
3rd of 541,514
95% range 1,487 to 1,541
546Source for Japanese
Korean
Language
4th of 541,484
95% range 1,458 to 1,511
586Source for Korean
Non-English prompts
Language
8th of 771,486
95% range 1,480 to 1,491
19,427Source for Non-English prompts
Russian
Language
6th of 771,513
95% range 1,503 to 1,523
4,131Source for Russian
Spanish
Language
9th of 701,489
95% range 1,470 to 1,508
1,028Source for Spanish
Entertainment, sport and media
Topic
9th of 771,475
95% range 1,468 to 1,483
8,563Source for Entertainment, sport and media
Law and government
Topic
12th of 761,497
95% range 1,485 to 1,509
2,688Source for Law and government
Medicine and health
Topic
10th of 751,497
95% range 1,484 to 1,510
2,309Source for Medicine and health
Science
Topic
8th of 771,511
95% range 1,503 to 1,520
5,367Source for Science
Software and IT
Topic
15th of 771,499
95% range 1,493 to 1,506
12,292Source for Software and IT

Bias: what we can and can't see

Our sources do not measure political lean, stereotyping, flattery (agreeing with you too readily) or safety behaviour, so we cannot say how any model does on those. What we can show is above: where a model is relatively stronger or weaker across languages, kinds of request and topics. Also, people voting in Arena can favour answer style, such as length and formatting, and our numbers do not adjust for that. See what AI bias means and what these tests can tell you.

Best-supported use cases

This model is not among the options we recommend for any of the five tasks. That reflects the rules and the models listed, not a verdict on the model.

Where an alternative might be more suitable

What it is

Maker
Google DeepMind
Release date (Epoch AI)
13 Aug 2026
Access, as listed by Epoch AI
API access
Licence, as listed by Arena
Proprietary
Maker's country (Epoch AI)
United States of America
Last observation in our data
28 Oct 2026
Data last changed
29 Oct 2026, 14:36 UTC

We have not verified an official product page for this model, so we do not link to one.

How you can use it

Proprietary. The model's files are not published, so it is generally available only through its maker or partners the maker chooses.

How you can reach it (an app, a website, a developer API or a third-party tool) and what that costs are not covered by our benchmark data. Where we could verify prices from the maker's own pages, they are shown under Price. Epoch AI lists access as “API access”. See models, apps and harnesses and how AI pricing works.

Price

Price not independently verified

See Gemini plans and pricing (checked 28 Oct 2026). Page opened and read.

We never infer subscription prices from API prices. New to “tokens” and “per million”? See how AI pricing works.

Good to remember

  • Benchmarks are samples of tasks. None proves performance in every situation.
  • Arena scores come from people choosing between answers. That measures preference, not correctness.
  • Ratings are relative to the 77 models listed here. A different set would change them.
  • Sources test models at different settings. Each result shows the setting used, and we do not adjust it.

The evidence, for the curious

Show all 13 tests with settings and sources
All published results for Gemini 3.7 Flash. Ratings compare only the 77 models on this site.
TestResultRatingSetting usedSource identifierObservedLinks
Arena text: overall preference
Arena 'text' leaderboard (Bradley-Terry rating, no style control)
1,489
Arena score
95% range 1,484 to 1,494, 32,289 votes
Top tier effort: High, bradley-terry rating Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
lmarena · text/latest
28 Oct 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash Arena text: overall preference score (lmarena)
Arena text: creative writing
Arena 'text' leaderboard, category creative_writing
1,487
Arena score
95% range 1,479 to 1,496, 7,129 votes
Top tier effort: High, bradley-terry rating Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
lmarena · text/latest
28 Oct 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash Arena text: creative writing score (lmarena)
Arena text: coding
Arena 'text' leaderboard, category coding
1,500
Arena score
95% range 1,493 to 1,507, 8,739 votes
Top tier effort: High, bradley-terry rating Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
lmarena · text/latest
28 Oct 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash Arena text: coding score (lmarena)
Arena text: maths
Arena 'text' leaderboard, category math
1,507
Arena score
95% range 1,492 to 1,522, 1,676 votes
Top tier effort: High, bradley-terry rating Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
lmarena · text/latest
28 Oct 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash Arena text: maths score (lmarena)
Arena text: following instructions
Arena 'text' leaderboard, category instruction_following
1,486
Arena score
95% range 1,479 to 1,492, 11,603 votes
Top tier effort: High, bradley-terry rating Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
lmarena · text/latest
28 Oct 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash Arena text: following instructions score (lmarena)
Arena text: business and management
Arena 'text' leaderboard, category industry_business_and_management_and_financial_operations
1,480
Arena score
95% range 1,472 to 1,489, 5,821 votes
Top tier effort: High, bradley-terry rating Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
lmarena · text/latest
28 Oct 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash Arena text: business and management score (lmarena)
Arena WebDev: building web apps
Arena 'webdev' leaderboard (Code Arena), category overall
1,590
Arena score
95% range 1,583 to 1,596, 14,473 votes
Strong effort: High, bradley-terry rating Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
lmarena · webdev/latest
28 Oct 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash Arena WebDev: building web apps score (lmarena)
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (private set), benchmark released 2026-06-12
71.6%
share of problems solved
standard error ±2.7 points
Strong effort: high, best score across scorers gemini-3.7-flash_high
epoch · frontiermath_tiers_1_3_v2.csv
14 Aug 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) score (epoch) · Run details for FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025, benchmark released 2024-12-19
97.2%
share of problems solved
standard error ±1.9 points
Strong effort: high, best score across scorers gemini-3.7-flash_high
epoch · otis_mock_aime_2024_2025.csv
14 Aug 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 score (epoch)
No public run log in the data file.
GPQA Diamond
GPQA Diamond, benchmark released 2023-11-20
94.8%
share of questions correct
standard error ±1.3 points
Top tier effort: high, best score across scorers gemini-3.7-flash_high
epoch · gpqa_diamond.csv
14 Aug 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash GPQA Diamond score (epoch)
No public run log in the data file.
SimpleQA Verified
SimpleQA Verified, benchmark released 2025-09-09
69.2%
share of questions correct
standard error ±1.5 points
Top tier effort: high, best score across scorers gemini-3.7-flash_high
epoch · simpleqa_verified.csv
27 Aug 2026 Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash SimpleQA Verified score (epoch) · Run details for SimpleQA Verified
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch runs)Not enough data
FrontierCode (reported by Cognition)
FrontierCode, benchmark released 2026-06-08, aggregation Mean@5
43.6%
mean score over 5 attempts
no uncertainty figure published
Not rated (results use different tools) effort: medium, tool: devin-cli, mean@5 gemini-3.7-flash_unknown
epoch · frontiercode_external.csv
not provided Source for Gemini 3.7 Flash FrontierCode (reported by Cognition) score (epoch) · Run details for FrontierCode (reported by Cognition)

Missing evidence

Not enough data for these tests:

  • SWE-bench Verified (Epoch runs)

Missing results are not low scores and do not count against the model.

Where a source gives no public run log, we cannot show the run behind the score. See data sources.

Not sure this is the right one?

Tell us what you need help with and we'll narrow the options down.

Find my AI