Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemini 2.0 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher in 6 categories and Gemini 2.0 Pro in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Sonnet 4 leads 43.5 to 37.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 61.3% for Claude Sonnet 4 and 35.6% for Gemini 2.0 Pro.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 39.1 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2025-02-05 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 64K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $3 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $15 | — |
| Results tracked | 58 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 4 leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 43.5 (#88), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 61.3% | 35.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 64.9% | — |
| SciCode | 40% | — |
| GSO | 4.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 46.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 63.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1414 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 655.35 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4: 38.5 (#31), Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 33.1% | — |
| Cybench | 35% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 43.9% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 62% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 4: 22.9 (#187), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 3.1% | 0.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.69 | 135.06 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 45.5% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 73% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 40% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 60.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1372 | — |
| DTBench | 77.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 68% |
| LMCA | 29% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.2 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 65.1% |
Math Claude Sonnet 4 leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 43.3 (#80), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 84.4% | 83.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 71.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 60.2% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 71% |
| LMArena Math | 1375 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4 leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 41.8 (#108), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79.2% | 65.7% |
| Confabulations | 13.2% | 18.4% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 7.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 84.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4: 26.2 (#121), Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1191 | — |
| GeoBench | 37% | — |
| VPCT | 34% | — |
| MindCube | 44.8% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4: 46.7 (#156), Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1333 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1350 | — |
| LMArena French | 1363 | — |
| LMArena German | 1331 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1302 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1291 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1355 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1357 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 71.7 (#145), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 83.4% |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | — |
Long Context Claude Sonnet 4 leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 33.7 (#259), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 46.9% | 41.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1398 | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4 leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 57.1 (#132), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1345 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1483 | — |
| WildBench | 83.8% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1376 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.9% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 4 better than Gemini 2.0 Pro?
Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Sonnet 4 or Gemini 2.0 Pro better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4 and Gemini 2.0 Pro share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4 has 58 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14.