Model comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 40.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 53× 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.

Claude Opus 4 Anthropic

42.9

Rank #93 Confirmed

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google

40.4

Rank #141 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 31 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 7 categories and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 4 leads 47.8 to 37.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 64.4% for Claude Opus 4 and 80% for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.25 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite specifications
Claude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index42.940.4
Released2025-05-222026-03-03
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1.05M
Max output32K66K
Input $ / M tokens$15$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$75$1.50
Results tracked5638

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 3.1 Flash Lite: 37.5 (#179)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
WeirdML43.7%52.2%
LMArena Coding14421400
SWE-bench Verified70.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)67.6%—
Aider Polyglot72%—
LMArena WebDev—1256
SciCode—41.9%
GSO6.9%—
ALE-Bench—797.73
AlgoTune1.33—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 34.5 (#39), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 29.9 (#72)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
DeepResearch Bench46.8%37.3%
Cybench38%—
LMArena Search1127—
METR Time Horizons63.9%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 27.4 (#104), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 22.3 (#181)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark74.3%67.2%
CritPt0.3%1.1%
EnigmaEval5.6%3%
LMArena Hard Prompts13991407
DTBench81.6%76.8%
LMCA37.4%35%
Epoch Capabilities Index142.67144.45
ForecastBench61.154.4
ARC-AGI-28.6%—
SimpleBench58.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)—8.2%
ARC-AGI-135.7%—
Chess Puzzles—25%
Thematic Generalization—63.3%

Math Too close to call

Claude Opus 4: 40.2 (#80), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 39.5 (#82)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202564.4%80%
LMArena Math13911427
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—27.7%
Omni-MATH61.6%—
MATH Level 585%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 43.9 (#82), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 41.7 (#95)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond76.3%81.8%
Humanity's Last Exam10.7%8.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%8.2%
LMArena Expert13841397
MMLU-Pro87.5%—
Confabulations15.9%—
GPQA (HELM)70.8%—

Multimodal Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Claude Opus 4: 30.9 (#101), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 38.7 (#57)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Vision11921240
GeoBench49%—
VPCT38%—

Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Claude Opus 4: 49.0 (#133), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 52.5 (#82)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Non-English13621410
LMArena Chinese13861461
LMArena French13701423
LMArena German13911429
LMArena Japanese13321411
LMArena Korean13181393
LMArena Russian13921420
LMArena Spanish13881420

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 77.3 (#26), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 72.9 (#126)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Instruction Following14061376
IFEval91.8%—

Long Context Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Claude Opus 4: 39.5 (#167), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 42.5 (#117)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Longer Query14221394
Fiction.LiveBench61.1%—

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Claude Opus 4: 61.4 (#85), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 61.0 (#90)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Text13771416
LMArena Creative Writing13861401
LMArena Multi-Turn13961417
Short-Story Creative Writing83.6%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1580—
WildBench85.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4 better than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 40.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 53× 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 3.1 Flash Lite?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better for coding?

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 37.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite share?

31 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper