# Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash

> Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 54.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-8-vs-gemini-3-5-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 53

## Summary

- They share 53 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 7 categories and Gemini 3.5 Flash in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 47.6 to 24.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GBAEval: 70.9% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 6.7% for Gemini 3.5 Flash.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $1.50 / $9 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google |
| Noometry Index | 60.7 | 54.1 |
| Rank | 9 | 29 |
| Context | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $5 | $1.50 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $9 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.8: 60.2 (#9)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 49.1 (#46)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 59% | 37.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1556 | 1499 |
| SciCode | 53.5% | 53.1% |
| WeirdML | 82.9% | 62.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1491 | 1492 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,564 | 911.02 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 79.3% |
| FrontierCode | 46.5% | — |
| GSO | 47.1% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#10)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 24.8 (#107)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 48.9% | 27.5% |
| GBAEval | 70.9% | 6.7% |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | 14% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,787 | 5,396 |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 20.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 8.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 50.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 33.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1204 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.8: 64.6 (#14)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 62.7 (#16)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 72.1% | 72.1% |
| SimpleBench | 64.8% | 76.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.1% | 92.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | 92.5% |
| CritPt | 20.9% | 13.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 34% | 50% |
| EnigmaEval | 23.5% | 25.4% |
| EBR-Bench | 28.6% | 4.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1488 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 36% | 32% |
| DTBench | 94.9% | 94.7% |
| LMCA | 57.5% | 47.1% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 87.5% | 58.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.3 | 154.55 |
| ForecastBench | 59.9 | 59 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 88.8% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.8: 78.2 (#11)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 60.5 (#30)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 80% | 62.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | 26.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 91.8% | 76.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | 69% | 31% |
| LMArena Math | 1487 | 1502 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 47.2% | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | 14.6% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#26)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 66.3 (#10)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91% | 92.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 53% | 66.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1501 | 1493 |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.8: 43.2 (#20)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.7 (#13)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1295 | 1311 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 14.5% | 33.6% |
| LMArena Document | 1475 | 1463 |
| Furniture Assembly | 42.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.8: 55.4 (#31)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 57.1 (#12)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1450 | 1475 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1509 | 1525 |
| LMArena French | 1482 | 1490 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1500 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1440 | 1481 |
| LMArena Korean | 1432 | 1453 |
| LMArena Russian | 1476 | 1491 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1470 | 1478 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.8: 77.6 (#22)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 77.2 (#29)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1466 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#37)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.3 (#39)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | 1481 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.8: 72.1 (#17)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: 65.5 (#46)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1460 | 1481 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1467 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1281 | 1087 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1476 | 1482 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1840 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 54.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $1.50 per million input tokens and $9 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

### Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemini 3.5 Flash better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 60.2 versus 49.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemini 3.5 Flash share?

53 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.5 Flash has 54.