Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 30 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and Gemini 2.5 Pro in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 91.8 to 32.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 95% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 0% for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper at $1.25 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index68.645.0
Released2026-09-222025-03-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$4$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$20$10
Results tracked4478

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 Pro: 42.4 (#101)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena WebDev18131227
SciCode66.9%42.8%
LMArena Coding15471452
ALE-Bench2,147785.52
SWE-bench Verified—57.6%
FrontierCode54.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—53.6%
Aider Polyglot—83.1%
CursorBench57.8%—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
GSO—3.9%
WeirdML—54%
LiveBench Coding—85.9%
MirrorCode77.4%—
CadEval—64%
AlgoTune—1.51

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
Vending-Bench 29,235573.64
Terminal-Bench—32.6%
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDPval—23.3%
Remote Labor Index—0.8%
TheAgentCompany—30.3%
τ²-bench Banking—13.7%
DeepResearch Bench—42.8%
BALROG—43.3%
GDP.pdf30.6%—
LMArena Search—1142
METR Time Horizons—55.4%

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
ARC-AGI-293.3%4.9%
ARC-AGI-198.5%41%
CritPt31.7%2%
LMArena Hard Prompts15351455
DTBench98.9%82.4%
LMCA68.2%34.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33145.32
SimpleBench—62.4%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—70.3%
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
Chess Puzzles—20%
EnigmaEval—5.6%
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning—89.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—79.9%
ForecastBench—61.3
LiveBench—82.3%

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%24.6%
FrontierMath Tier 495%0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%84.7%
LMArena Math15061450
ProofBench100%—
Omni-MATH—41.6%
LiveBench Math—90.2%
MATH Level 5—95.9%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—14.1%
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—4.2%

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
GPQA Diamond90.6%85.3%
LMArena Expert15471452
Humanity's Last Exam—21.6%
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
MMLU-Pro—86.3%
Confabulations—10.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—7%
GPQA (HELM)—74.9%

Multimodal Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision13211263
GeoBench—86%
VPCT—48%
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—
LMArena Document—1421
SpatialViz-Bench—44.7%

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Non-English15071451
LMArena Chinese15881507
LMArena French15141472
LMArena Russian15201461
LMArena Spanish15071473
LMArena German—1487
LMArena Japanese—1461
LMArena Korean—1434

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Instruction Following15371437
LiveBench Instruction Following—80.6%
IFEval—84%

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Longer Query15321449
Fiction.LiveBench—91.7%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text15151458
LMArena Creative Writing15331454
EQ-Bench Creative Writing20501421
LMArena Multi-Turn14991453
Short-Story Creative Writing—83.8%
WildBench—85.7%
LiveBench Language—67.8%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs 2.3× 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 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 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 5.5 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share?

30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78.

Related comparisons

Go deeper