Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 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 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 52 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 52 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemini 2.5 Pro in 2 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 63.0 to 32.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 69.2% for Claude Opus 4.6 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 4.6.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.245.0
Released2026-02-042025-03-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$10
Results tracked6878

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: 57.2 (#20), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
SWE-bench Verified78.7%57.6%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%53.6%
LMArena WebDev15471227
GSO41.2%3.9%
WeirdML78%54%
LMArena Coding15361452
ALE-Bench996.5785.52
AlgoTune1.471.51
FrontierCode26.6%—
Aider Polyglot—83.1%
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
SciCode—42.8%
LiveBench Coding—85.9%
CadEval—64%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
Terminal-Bench79.8%32.6%
Remote Labor Index4.2%0.8%
τ²-bench Banking27.3%13.7%
DeepResearch Bench55.3%42.8%
LMArena Search12531142
METR Time Horizons78.9%55.4%
Vending-Bench 28,018573.64
APEX-Agents46.3%—
GDPval—23.3%
TheAgentCompany—30.3%
Cybench93%—
BALROG—43.3%
GBAEval44.1%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
ARC-AGI-269.2%4.9%
SimpleBench67.6%62.4%
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%70.3%
ARC-AGI-194%41%
Chess Puzzles17%20%
EnigmaEval7.6%5.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts15271455
DTBench91.2%82.4%
LMCA55.8%34.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24145.32
ForecastBench6061.3
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
CritPt—2%
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning—89.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—79.9%
LiveBench—82.3%

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%24.6%
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%84.7%
LMArena Math15191450
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%14.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%4.2%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
ProofBench50%—
Omni-MATH—41.6%
LiveBench Math—90.2%
MATH Level 5—95.9%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
GPQA Diamond90.5%85.3%
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%21.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%7%
LMArena Expert15461452
SimpleQA Verified47%—
MMLU-Pro—86.3%
Confabulations—10.6%
GPQA (HELM)—74.9%

Multimodal Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision13161263
LMArena Document15071421
GeoBench—86%
VPCT—48%
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
SpatialViz-Bench—44.7%

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Non-English14891451
LMArena Chinese15511507
LMArena French15131472
LMArena German15021487
LMArena Japanese14841461
LMArena Korean14641434
LMArena Russian14971461
LMArena Spanish15101473

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Instruction Following15231437
LiveBench Instruction Following—80.6%
IFEval—84%

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Longer Query15201449
Fiction.LiveBench—91.7%
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text15031458
LMArena Creative Writing15051454
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18091421
LMArena Multi-Turn15131453
Short-Story Creative Writing—83.8%
WildBench—85.7%
EQ-Bench 41223—
LiveBench Language—67.8%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 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 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 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 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 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 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share?

52 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78.

Related comparisons

Go deeper