Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 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 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in 2 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads 35.5 to 22.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 37.1% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 18.1% 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 4.1.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 36.4 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 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 | 48 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#167)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 45.9% | 35.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1373 |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | 325.9 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 27.8 (#89)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 36.9% |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 21.5 (#196)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1377 |
| DTBench | 80% | 62.8% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 18.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | 133.93 |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 40.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 35.5 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1373 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 48% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.1 (#206)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | 3.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1373 |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.7% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 30.9% |
Multimodal Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | 30% |
| LMArena Vision | — | 1198 |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.5 (#129)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1369 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1404 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1388 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1359 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1358 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1373 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1396 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.2 (#163)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1366 |
| IFEval | — | 81% |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#257)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1373 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 47.2% |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 57.0 (#130)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1379 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1366 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1367 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
| WildBench | — | 81.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?
Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 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 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 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 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 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 4.1 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33.