Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash costs 12× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 38 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Flash Google

39.3

Rank #170 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 38 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 9 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.8 to 18.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 69.2% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 2.5% for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.239.3
Released2026-02-042025-04-17
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$25$2.50
Results tracked6854

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%28.7%
WeirdML78%41.9%
LMArena Coding15361424
ALE-Bench996.5661.88
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
Aider Polyglot—55.1%
LMArena WebDev1547—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
GSO41.2%—
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
Terminal-Bench79.8%17.1%
Vending-Bench 28,018548.84
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—56.2%
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
TheAgentCompany—41.1%
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
BALROG—33.5%
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
ARC-AGI-269.2%2.5%
SimpleBench67.6%41.2%
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%56.8%
ARC-AGI-194%33.3%
EnigmaEval7.6%2.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts15271422
DTBench91.2%76.5%
LMCA55.8%27.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24143.03
ForecastBench6060.6
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
CritPt—1.1%
Chess Puzzles17%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%73.1%
LMArena Math15191415
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%4.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%4.2%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
ProofBench50%—
Omni-MATH—38.5%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%12.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%7.8%
LMArena Expert15461426
GPQA Diamond90.5%—
SimpleQA Verified47%—
MMLU-Pro—63.9%
Confabulations—16.8%
GPQA (HELM)—39%

Multimodal Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Vision13161253
GeoBench—76%
VPCT—46.2%
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—
SpatialViz-Bench—36.9%

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Non-English14891409
LMArena Chinese15511450
LMArena French15131433
LMArena German15021418
LMArena Japanese14841405
LMArena Korean14641385
LMArena Russian14971415
LMArena Spanish15101421

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following15231405
IFEval—89.8%

Long Context Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Longer Query15201419
Fiction.LiveBench—77.8%
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text15031417
LMArena Creative Writing15051400
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18091137
LMArena Multi-Turn15131408
Short-Story Creative Writing—76.5%
WildBench—81.7%
EQ-Bench 41223—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash costs 12× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash share?

38 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54.

Related comparisons

Go deeper