Model comparison
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 46× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 10 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 80.2 to 22.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 68.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 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 $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 68.6 | 37.0 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2025-06-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $4 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $20 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 44 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1547 | 1373 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,147 | 325.9 |
| FrontierCode | 54.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1813 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | — |
| SciCode | 66.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 35.2% |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 36.9% |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,235 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1535 | 1377 |
| DTBench | 98.9% | 62.8% |
| LMCA | 68.2% | 18.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 167.33 | 133.94 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 93.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 40.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | — |
Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1506 | 1373 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 48% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1547 | 1373 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 3.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 30.9% |
Multimodal Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | 1198 |
| VPCT | — | 30% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 51.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1369 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1588 | 1404 |
| LMArena French | 1514 | 1388 |
| LMArena Russian | 1520 | 1373 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1507 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1359 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1360 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1537 | 1367 |
| IFEval | — | 81% |
Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1532 | 1373 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 47.2% |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1515 | 1379 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1533 | 1367 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1499 | 1366 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | — |
| WildBench | — | 81.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?
Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 46× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 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 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better for coding?
Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33.