Model comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 171× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 31 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 31 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 9 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4 leads 43.9 to 32.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA (HELM): 70.8% for Claude Opus 4 and 30.9% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 36.4 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2025-06-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 32K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 56 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 47.8 (#55), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#167)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 43.7% | 35.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1373 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 325.9 |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 34.5 (#39), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 27.8 (#89)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 36.9% |
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1127 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 27.4 (#104), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 21.5 (#196)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | 40.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1377 |
| DTBench | 81.6% | 62.8% |
| LMCA | 37.4% | 18.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | 133.93 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 40.2 (#80), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 35.5 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | 48% |
| LMArena Math | 1391 | 1373 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 43.9 (#82), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.1 (#206)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | 53.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | 3.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | 30.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1384 | 1373 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
Multimodal Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 30.9 (#101), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | 1198 |
| VPCT | 38% | 30% |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Claude Opus 4: 49.0 (#133), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.5 (#129)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1369 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1404 |
| LMArena French | 1370 | 1388 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1332 | 1359 |
| LMArena Korean | 1318 | 1358 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1373 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1388 | 1396 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 77.3 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.2 (#163)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 91.8% | 81% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1366 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 39.5 (#167), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#257)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | 47.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1373 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 61.4 (#85), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 57.0 (#130)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1379 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1386 | 1366 |
| WildBench | 85.2% | 81.8% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1367 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 171× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 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 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4 or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better for coding?
Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 38.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite share?
31 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33.