GPT Daybreak Blue vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 pricing
Side-by-side token pricing for GPT Daybreak Blue (OpenAI) and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 (Google Gemini), plus the total cost at three workload sizes so the crossover point is obvious. Prices refreshed 2026-09-13 13:40 UTC.
| Metric | GPT Daybreak Blue | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 |
|---|---|---|
| Input $/1M tokens | $4 | $0.1 |
| Output $/1M tokens | $20 | $0.4 |
| Cached input $/1M | $0.4 | $0.01 |
| Context window | 1.1M | 1.0M |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Vision | yes | yes |
| Tool calling | yes | yes |
| Cache pricing | yes | yes |
Total cost by workload
| Workload | GPT Daybreak Blue | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 | Cheaper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1M tokens in · 300K out | $10 | $0.22 | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 (98% less) |
| 10M tokens in · 3M out | $100 | $2.2 | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 (98% less) |
| 100M tokens in · 30M out | $1000 | $22 | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 (98% less) |
On blended cost (weighted 3:1 toward input), Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 comes out cheaper by roughly 98% on input pricing. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 when the workload is price-sensitive and its context window covers your prompts; GPT Daybreak Blue is the one to benchmark if you need vision, reasoning depth, or a different quality profile.
Frequently asked
› Is GPT Daybreak Blue cheaper than Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17?
On input pricing, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17 is cheaper ($0.1 vs $4 per 1M tokens). On blended cost the winner is Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06 17, because output tokens are weighted differently for most workloads.
› Which has the larger context window?
GPT Daybreak Blue offers the larger context (1.1M tokens).
› Do these prices include prompt caching?
Cached input is priced separately where a provider publishes a cache rate; the table above lists it per model so the comparison stays like-for-like.