Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite

Claude Opus 4.6 leads Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 31.9 to 10.4, and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs 62.5x less per output token ($0.40 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 24 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic
Coding
57.2
Overall
66.0
Output $/M
$25.00
24
Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 24 shared

Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite: which to pick

Only Claude Opus 4.6 has a coding score, 57.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 62.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $25.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).

Shared results
24
Claude Opus 4.6 only
86
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
6
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.6 57.2 from 4 benchmarks, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 73.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Claude Opus 4.6 92.1% against Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 19.0%, 73.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.6 $25.00 against Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 per million output tokens, 62.5x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.6 takes 1M tokens, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.6BarsGemini 2.5 Flash LiteTies
Coding20
Intelligence20
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math10
Knowledge70
General60
All shared boards240
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
SWE-bench Verified75.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual72.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev1547Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)84.7%71.4%Claude Opus 4.6
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)78.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)57.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured59.3%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)48.5%4.5%Claude Opus 4.6
Terminal-Bench79.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
FrontierCode26.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
GSO-Bench41.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
WeirdML78.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Cybench93.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding1534Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1527Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1539Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1559Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1543Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
AA Intelligence Index31.910.4Claude Opus 4.6
Epoch Capabilities Index155.7133.8Claude Opus 4.6
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1206Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1220Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1207Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1196Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1212Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom92.1%19.0%Claude Opus 4.6
APEX-Agents46.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
METR time horizons78.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Remote Labor Index4.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
DeepResearch Bench55.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Vending-Bench 2$8,018Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured36.9%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
GPQA Diamond89.7%70.2%Claude Opus 4.6
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)83.9%75.4%Claude Opus 4.6
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.6%62.5%Claude Opus 4.6
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)39.9%6.8%Claude Opus 4.6
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
ARC-AGI94.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
ARC-AGI-269.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
SimpleBench67.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Chess puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Mystery game puzzles25.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
EBR-bench12.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1525Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: expert1544Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1530Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1340Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1337Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%40.5%Claude Opus 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
AIME95.6%42.1%Claude Opus 4.6
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured89.5%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
AA Math IndexNot measured53.3Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured53.3%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
OTIS Mock AIME94.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 366.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
FrontierMath, tier 426.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
ProofBench50.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: math1518Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1525Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
MMLU Pro89.1%79.1%Claude Opus 4.6
LegalBench (Vals AI)85.3%82.0%Claude Opus 4.6
CaseLaw (Vals AI)62.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)67.0%57.6%Claude Opus 4.6
TaxEval (Vals AI)76.0%66.2%Claude Opus 4.6
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.5%57.6%Claude Opus 4.6
MedQA (Vals AI)95.4%88.9%Claude Opus 4.6
MedCode (Vals AI)49.1%34.2%Claude Opus 4.6
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured75.9%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
SimpleQA Verified47.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: science1519Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1504Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1512Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1497Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite41.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
Design Arena: websites1291Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: UI components1284Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: game dev1278Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: data viz1279Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: 3D1274Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1289Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: SVG1228Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1255Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)51.6%30.8%Claude Opus 4.6
MedScribe (Vals AI)86.7%75.8%Claude Opus 4.6
IFBench53.1%49.9%Claude Opus 4.6
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.0%55.7%Claude Opus 4.6
DTBench91.2%62.8%Claude Opus 4.6
LMCA55.8%18.1%Claude Opus 4.6
CL-bench20.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Furniture assembly28.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
CL-bench Life17.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text1501Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1521Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1505Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision1316Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: English1511Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1488Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1551Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: German1500Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1488Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1464Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: French1512Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1510Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1497Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1499Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1511Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1518Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1502Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1492Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: English1324Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1370Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1326Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1314Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1274Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1331Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Document1507Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.6$0.018Fits in one request
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.0003Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.6$0.325Fits in one request
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.0062Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.6$1.25Fits in one request
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.024Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.6Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
MakerAnthropicGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedFebruary 4, 2026July 22, 2025
Context window1M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$5.00$0.10
Output $/Mtok$25.00$0.40
Coding index57.2Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it40
Cost per solved task$1.56Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for coding?

Only Claude Opus 4.6 has a coding score, 57.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 62.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $25.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite?

Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for Claude Opus 4.6 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite?

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite comparison based on?

24 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.6's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next