Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 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 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Google

37.0

Rank #211 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8 leads 64.7 to 22.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 88.8% for Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index60.737.0
Released2026-05-282025-06-17
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.40
Results tracked6533

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
WeirdML82.9%35.2%
LMArena Coding14901373
ALE-Bench1,564325.9
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
LMArena WebDev1556—
SciCode53.5%—
GSO47.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
APEX-Agents48.9%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—36.9%
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
LMArena Search1204—
Vending-Bench 25,787—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%40.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14821377
DTBench94.9%62.8%
LMCA57.5%18.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21133.94
ARC-AGI-272.1%—
SimpleBench64.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
ARC-AGI-192.5%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles34%—
EnigmaEval23.5%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
ForecastBench59.9—

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Math14871373
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%—
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%—
ProofBench69%—
Omni-MATH—48%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Expert15021373
GPQA Diamond91%—
SimpleQA Verified53%—
MMLU-Pro—53.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—3.3%
GPQA (HELM)—30.9%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Vision12941198
VPCT—30%
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Non-English14501369
LMArena Chinese15071404
LMArena French14811388
LMArena German14721389
LMArena Japanese14401359
LMArena Korean14321360
LMArena Russian14741373
LMArena Spanish14661396

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Instruction Following14761367
IFEval—81%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Longer Query14831373
Fiction.LiveBench—47.2%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Text14611379
LMArena Creative Writing14541367
LMArena Multi-Turn14761366
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
WildBench—81.8%
EQ-Bench 41281—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 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 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 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 4.8 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper