Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 4 Argon
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 56.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 5 categories and Gemini 4 Argon in 5 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 61.9 to 43.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 50% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 99% for Gemini 4 Argon.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 58.2 | 56.5 |
| Released | 2026-02-04 | 2026-09-30 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 68 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 4 Argon leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), Gemini 4 Argon: 62.0 (#9)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1547 | 1678 |
| LMArena Coding | 1536 | 1550 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 78.7% | — |
| FrontierCode | 26.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 75.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 72% | — |
| FrontierSWE | — | 55% |
| SciCode | — | 61.8% |
| GSO | 41.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 78% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 996.5 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.47 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Gemini 4 Argon: 49.2 (#8)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 46.3% | 82.2% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8,018 | 13,718 |
| Terminal-Bench | 79.8% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 4.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 27.3% | — |
| Cybench | 93% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 55.3% | — |
| GBAEval | 44.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1253 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 78.9% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Gemini 4 Argon: 44.2 (#47)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1527 | 1548 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 69.2% | — |
| SimpleBench | 67.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94% | — |
| CritPt | — | 27.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 17% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 80.6% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 12.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 25% | — |
| DTBench | 91.2% | — |
| LMCA | 55.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.24 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60 | — |
Math Gemini 4 Argon leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Gemini 4 Argon: 73.9 (#17)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 50% | 99% |
| LMArena Math | 1519 | 1536 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 66% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 78.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 94.4% | — |
| 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 4 Argon: 43.9 (#89)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1546 | 1553 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 34.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 47% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.2% | — |
Multimodal Gemini 4 Argon leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Gemini 4 Argon: 46.5 (#14)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 54.4% |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1507 | — |
Multilingual Gemini 4 Argon leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Gemini 4 Argon: 60.3 (#1)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1489 | 1523 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1551 | 1610 |
| LMArena Russian | 1497 | 1537 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1510 | 1497 |
| LMArena French | 1513 | — |
| LMArena German | 1502 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1484 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1464 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Gemini 4 Argon: 80.1 (#2)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1523 | 1538 |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Gemini 4 Argon: 47.6 (#15)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1520 | 1549 |
| CL-bench | 20.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 17% | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Gemini 4 Argon: 71.4 (#19)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1503 | 1534 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1505 | 1531 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1513 | 1557 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1809 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1223 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 4 Argon?
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 56.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 4 Argon better for coding?
Gemini 4 Argon scores higher on coding benchmarks: 62.0 versus 57.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 4 Argon share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 4 Argon has 21.