Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 57× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Google

37.0

Rank #211 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 10 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.8 to 22.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 83.6% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 40.5% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.237.0
Released2026-02-042025-06-17
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.40
Results tracked6833

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-Lite: 38.5 (#173)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
WeirdML78%35.2%
LMArena Coding15361373
ALE-Bench996.5325.9
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%—
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-Lite: 28.0 (#96)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—36.9%
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%40.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts15271377
DTBench91.2%62.8%
LMCA55.8%18.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24133.94
ARC-AGI-269.2%—
SimpleBench67.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
ARC-AGI-194%—
Chess Puzzles17%—
EnigmaEval7.6%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
ForecastBench60—

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Math15191373
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%—
ProofBench50%—
Omni-MATH—48%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%3.3%
LMArena Expert15461373
GPQA Diamond90.5%—
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%—
SimpleQA Verified47%—
MMLU-Pro—53.7%
GPQA (HELM)—30.9%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Vision13161198
VPCT—30%
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Non-English14891369
LMArena Chinese15511404
LMArena French15131388
LMArena German15021389
LMArena Japanese14841359
LMArena Korean14641360
LMArena Russian14971373
LMArena Spanish15101396

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Instruction Following15231367
IFEval—81%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Longer Query15201373
Fiction.LiveBench—47.2%
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Text15031379
LMArena Creative Writing15051367
LMArena Multi-Turn15131366
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1809—
WildBench—81.8%
EQ-Bench 41223—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 57× 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-Lite?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

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

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

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

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper