FLUX.1 Pro vs Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)
| Signal | FLUX.1 Pro | Delta | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 14 | -57 | |
Pricing | 5 | -92 | |
Context window size | 0 | -81 | |
Recency | 0 | -77 | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -57 | |
Benchmarks | 0 | -80 | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 6 | 6 wins |
Score History
8
current score
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)
right now
76.9
current score
FLUX.1 Pro
Black Forest Labs
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)
FLUX.1 Pro saves you $155.00/month
That's $1860.00/year compared to Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | FLUX.1 Pro | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 8 | 77 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Rank | #13 | #4 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Quality Rank | #13 | #4 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Adoption Rank | #13 | #4 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | -- | 33K | -- |
| Pricing | Free | $0.30/$2.50/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 14 | 71 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Pricing | 5 | 98 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Context window size | 0 | 81 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Recency | 0 | 77 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 77 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
| Benchmarks | -- | 81 | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 8/100 (rank #13), placing it in the top 96% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 77/100 (rank #4), placing it in the top 99% of all 290 models tracked.
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) has a 69-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Choose FLUX.1 Pro when you need:
- High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
Choose Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) when you need:
- Multimodal workflows that require image understanding
Compare the cost per quality point to find the best value for your specific workload.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. FLUX.1 Pro also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (33K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (77/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) clearly outperforms FLUX.1 Pro with a significant 68.9-point lead. For most general use cases, Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) is the stronger choice. However, FLUX.1 Pro may still excel in niche scenarios.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
FLUX.1 Pro
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
FLUX.1 Pro
100% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
FLUX.1 Pro
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
FLUX.1 Pro
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
FLUX.1 Pro
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Black Forest Labs
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- Choose for Cost - 100% lower pricing; better value at scale
- Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
- Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
- Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
| Capability | FLUX.1 Pro | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streamingdiffers | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
FLUX.1 Pro
Black Forest Labs
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)
FLUX.1 Pro saves you $3.54/month
That's 100% cheaper than Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | FLUX.1 Pro | Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | -- | 33K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | 8,192 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Aug 1, 2024 | Oct 7, 2025 |
FLUX.1 Pro appears to be positioned as a premium specialized image generation model with no context window or multi-modal capabilities, suggesting it's designed for high-quality single image outputs. The extreme pricing likely reflects either computational intensity for superior image quality or a deliberate enterprise-only positioning, though with a score of only 13/100 versus Nano Banana's 50/100, the value proposition is questionable.
Nano Banana's 33K context window enables complex multi-turn image editing conversations and detailed prompt refinement, while FLUX.1 Pro's zero-token window suggests a single-shot API design. This makes Nano Banana suitable for iterative creative workflows at $2.50/M outputs, whereas FLUX.1 Pro's $50,000/M pricing forces users to get their prompts perfect on the first try.
FLUX.1 Pro's 13/100 score and near-bottom ranking combined with its astronomical pricing suggests it either serves a very narrow niche (perhaps specific artistic styles or resolution requirements) or is essentially deprecated. Black Forest Labs may be maintaining it for legacy enterprise contracts, as the 37-point score gap and lack of modern features like vision input, streaming, and JSON mode make it hard to justify for new deployments.
Migration seems inevitable given Nano Banana's $2.50/M output pricing versus FLUX.1 Pro's $50,000/M, unless FLUX.1 Pro produces uniquely styled outputs that can't be replicated. Nano Banana's additional vision input capabilities and 33K token context could actually enable more sophisticated workflows than FLUX.1 Pro's text-only, zero-context approach allows.
Google's Nano Banana leverages their broader Gemini infrastructure to offer text+image input and output at $0.30/M input and $2.50/M output, while Black Forest Labs' FLUX.1 Pro is a single-purpose text-to-image model at $50,000/M output. The 50/100 versus 13/100 scores suggest that Google's general-purpose approach is outperforming specialized models, likely due to larger training datasets and transfer learning from their language models.