Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 47 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 47 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 7 categories and Gemini 2.5 Pro in 3 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 32.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 72.1% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 4.9% for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper at $1.25 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index60.745.0
Released2026-05-282025-03-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$10
Results tracked6578

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 Pro: 42.4 (#101)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena WebDev15561227
SciCode53.5%42.8%
GSO47.1%3.9%
WeirdML82.9%54%
LMArena Coding14901452
ALE-Bench1,564785.52
SWE-bench Verified—57.6%
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—53.6%
Aider Polyglot—83.1%
LiveBench Coding—85.9%
CadEval—64%
AlgoTune—1.51

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
Remote Labor Index8.3%0.8%
τ²-bench Banking39.7%13.7%
DeepResearch Bench50.2%42.8%
LMArena Search12041142
Vending-Bench 25,787573.64
Terminal-Bench—32.6%
APEX-Agents48.9%—
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
GDPval—23.3%
TheAgentCompany—30.3%
PostTrainBench33.8%—
BALROG—43.3%
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
METR Time Horizons—55.4%

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
ARC-AGI-272.1%4.9%
SimpleBench64.8%62.4%
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%70.3%
ARC-AGI-192.5%41%
CritPt20.9%2%
Chess Puzzles34%20%
EnigmaEval23.5%5.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14821455
DTBench94.9%82.4%
LMCA57.5%34.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21145.32
ForecastBench59.961.3
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning—89.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—79.9%
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
LiveBench—82.3%

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%24.6%
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%84.7%
LMArena Math14871450
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%14.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%4.2%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
ProofBench69%—
Omni-MATH—41.6%
LiveBench Math—90.2%
MATH Level 5—95.9%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
GPQA Diamond91%85.3%
LMArena Expert15021452
Humanity's Last Exam—21.6%
SimpleQA Verified53%—
MMLU-Pro—86.3%
Confabulations—10.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—7%
GPQA (HELM)—74.9%

Multimodal Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision12941263
LMArena Document14751421
GeoBench—86%
VPCT—48%
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
SpatialViz-Bench—44.7%

Multilingual Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Non-English14501451
LMArena Chinese15071507
LMArena French14811472
LMArena German14721487
LMArena Japanese14401461
LMArena Korean14321434
LMArena Russian14741461
LMArena Spanish14661473

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Instruction Following14761437
LiveBench Instruction Following—80.6%
IFEval—84%

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Longer Query14831449
Fiction.LiveBench—91.7%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text14611458
LMArena Creative Writing14541454
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18401421
LMArena Multi-Turn14761453
Short-Story Creative Writing—83.8%
WildBench—85.7%
EQ-Bench 41281—
LiveBench Language—67.8%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs 2.9× 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 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemini 2.5 Pro better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share?

47 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78.

Related comparisons

Go deeper