Model comparison
Claude 2 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2 scores higher in 0 categories and Gemini 2.5 Pro in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 56.0 to 16.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 11.7% for Claude 2 and 95.9% for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
Side by side
| Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 25.0 | 45.0 |
| Released | 2023-07-11 | 2025-03-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $10 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 78 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 53.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 83.1% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1227 |
| SciCode | — | 42.8% |
| GSO | — | 3.9% |
| WeirdML | — | 54% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 85.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1452 |
| CadEval | — | 64% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.52 |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.51 |
| HumanEval+ | 61.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 32.6% |
| GDPval | — | 23.3% |
| Remote Labor Index | — | 0.8% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 30.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 13.7% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 42.8% |
| BALROG | — | 43.3% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1142 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 55.4% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 573.64 |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Claude 2: 21.7 (#216), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51.9% | 82.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 120.13 | 145.32 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | — | 62.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 70.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 41% |
| CritPt | — | 2% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 89.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1455 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 79.9% |
| LMCA | — | 34.8% |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 82.3% |
Math Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Claude 2: 9.3 (#320), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.5% | 84.7% |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | 95.9% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 24.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 0% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 90.2% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 14.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Claude 2: 16.9 (#287), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 34.7% | 85.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 21.6% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 86.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 10.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 74.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1452 |
| MMLU | 78.5% | — |
| TriviaQA | 87.5% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1263 |
| GeoBench | — | 86% |
| VPCT | — | 48% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1421 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 44.7% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1451 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1507 |
| LMArena French | — | 1472 |
| LMArena German | — | 1487 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1461 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1434 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1461 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1473 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 80.6% |
| IFEval | — | 84% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1437 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 91.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1449 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1458 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1454 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83.8% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1421 |
| WildBench | — | 85.7% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1453 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 67.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share?
5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2 has 8 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78.