Migration assistant

Replacing Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?

Ranked replacement candidates, each shown with exactly what changes if you switch. Same-provider matches surface first because switching cost is lower; capability regressions are flagged in red.

GG
Migrating from

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite

Google Gemini · Gemini 3.1 · Active
Input: $0.13/M Output: $0.75/M Context: 1M
View detail →
#1 RECOMMENDED

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Google Gemini · Gemini 2.5
same provider; 20% cheaper input; 1M context (larger)
View full detail →
What changes if you switch
Field Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite → Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Impact
Input price $0.13/M → $0.1/M Save 20%
Output price $0.75/M → $0.4/M Save 47%
Context window 1M tokens → 1M tokens +5% larger
Vision input ✓ supported → ✓ supported Preserved
Audio input ✓ supported → ✓ supported Preserved
Video input ✓ supported → ✓ supported Preserved
Function calling ✓ supported → ✓ supported Preserved
Structured output (JSON) ✓ supported → ✓ supported Preserved
Prompt caching ✓ supported → ✓ supported Preserved
Lifecycle Active → Active Same status
Other candidates
#2

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Google Gemini
same provider; same family; 1500% more expensive input; 1M context (larger)
Details →
Input price: +1500% more expensiveOutput price: +1500% more expensiveContext window: +5% largerLifecycle: Preview / limited access
#3

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Google Gemini
same provider; 20% cheaper input; 1M context (larger); loses 1 capability
Details →
Input price: Save 20%Output price: Save 47%Context window: +5% largerPrompt caching: LOST — re-evaluate before switching
#4

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Google Gemini
same provider; 140% more expensive input; 1M context (larger)
Details →
Input price: +140% more expensiveOutput price: +233% more expensiveContext window: +5% larger
#5

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Google Gemini
same provider; 900% more expensive input; 1M context (larger)
Details →
Input price: +900% more expensiveOutput price: +1233% more expensiveContext window: +5% larger
Methodology

How candidates are ranked

Candidates are ranked by how much of the source model's profile each one preserves — weighing switching cost (same provider or model family surface first), capability parity (what you keep versus what you'd lose), context window, and pricing direction. A candidate that is itself deprecated is pushed down the list; one that's already retired is never recommended.

Ranking is purely algorithmic — no editorial weighting, no paid placement. Every value is pulled from each provider's own documentation; click any model name to see the source-linked detail.