Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 1.0 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemini 1.0 Pro in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 62.7 to 8.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 94.4% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 1.1% for Gemini 1.0 Pro.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 58.3 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2026-02-04 | 2023-12-13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 68 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.7 (#15), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 31.6 (#270)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1535 | 1108 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 78.7% | — |
| FrontierCode | 26.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 75.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1546 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 72% | — |
| GSO | 41.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 78% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 996.5 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.47 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 55.5% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 51.0 (#4), Gemini 1.0 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 79.8% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 46.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 4.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 27.3% | — |
| Cybench | 93% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 55.3% | — |
| GBAEval | 44.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1253 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 78.9% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8,018 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.7 (#21), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 16.4 (#292)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1527 | 1109 |
| DTBench | 91.2% | 45.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.36 | 116.97 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 69.2% | — |
| SimpleBench | 67.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 17% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 80.6% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 12.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 25% | — |
| LMCA | 55.8% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 62.7 (#25), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 8.7 (#315)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 94.4% | 1.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1517 | 1132 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 66% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 78.5% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 11.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 40.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 61.8 (#23), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 15.5 (#286)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | 34% |
| LMArena Expert | 1546 | 1059 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 34.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 47% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.2% | — |
| MMLU | — | 70% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 37.0 (#67), Gemini 1.0 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1507 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 58.2 (#4), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 33.5 (#247)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1490 | 1138 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1551 | 1124 |
| LMArena French | 1513 | 1144 |
| LMArena German | 1504 | 1125 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1484 | 1023 |
| LMArena Russian | 1497 | 1186 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1512 | 1118 |
| LMArena Korean | 1465 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 79.7 (#3), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 57.9 (#262)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1523 | 1114 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 34.3 (#244)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1520 | 1132 |
| CL-bench | 20.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 17% | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 73.7 (#9), Gemini 1.0 Pro: 36.2 (#259)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 1.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1504 | 1149 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1506 | 1130 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1514 | 1139 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1809 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1223 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 1.0 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 1.0 Pro better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.7 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 1.0 Pro share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 1.0 Pro has 24.