Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 36 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google

40.8

Rank #144 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 36 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 9 categories and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.8 to 22.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 92.1% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 8.2% for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.25 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.240.8
Released2026-02-042026-03-03
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.50
Results tracked6838

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 3.1 Flash Lite: 37.8 (#188)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena WebDev15471256
WeirdML78%52.2%
LMArena Coding15361400
ALE-Bench996.5797.73
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
SciCode—41.9%
GSO41.2%—
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 30.2 (#79)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
DeepResearch Bench55.3%37.3%
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
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 3.1 Flash Lite: 22.9 (#186)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%67.2%
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%8.2%
Chess Puzzles17%25%
EnigmaEval7.6%3%
Thematic Generalization80.6%63.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts15271407
DTBench91.2%76.8%
LMCA55.8%35%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24144.47
ForecastBench6054.4
ARC-AGI-269.2%—
SimpleBench67.6%—
ARC-AGI-194%—
CritPt—1.1%
EBR-Bench12.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 40.7 (#90)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%27.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%80%
LMArena Math15191428
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
ProofBench50%—
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 3.1 Flash Lite: 41.9 (#104)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond90.5%81.8%
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%8.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%8.2%
LMArena Expert15461398
SimpleQA Verified47%—

Multimodal Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 39.4 (#60)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Vision13161240
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 52.3 (#86)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Non-English14891411
LMArena Chinese15511461
LMArena French15131424
LMArena German15021429
LMArena Japanese14841413
LMArena Korean14641392
LMArena Russian14971420
LMArena Spanish15101421

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 72.7 (#131)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Instruction Following15231377

Long Context Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 42.5 (#122)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Longer Query15201394
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 60.9 (#94)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Text15031416
LMArena Creative Writing15051401
LMArena Multi-Turn15131417
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1809—
EQ-Bench 41223—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 18× 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 3.1 Flash Lite?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite share?

36 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper