Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus #142 (Supported); Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus and Gemini 2.5 Pro share 3 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 4.1 Opus; 21 to Gemini 2.5 Pro.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 1
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 21
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4.1 Opus only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Gemini 2.5 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 57.25 to 45.88. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude 4.1 Opus is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Pro. That is roughly 7.5x on output cost alone. Gemini 2.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 4.1 Opus | Δ | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4.1 Opus74.5 | Margin← 10.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8 |
| Knowledge | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4 |
| Math | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 74.5%B 63.8%Winner: Claude 4.1 OpusΔ 10.7SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4.1 Opus scored 74.5%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 63.8%. Claude 4.1 Opus wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4.1 Opus | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus$15 input / $75 output | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 output | Gemini 2.5 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4.1 Opus29 tok/s | Gemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/s | Gemini 2.5 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4.1 Opus1.66 s | Gemini 2.5 Pro21.19 s | Claude 4.1 Opus reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus200K | Gemini 2.5 Pro1M | Gemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic6 benchmarks
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 28.2% | 25.8% | Claude 4.1 Opus leads |
| GPQASource | — | 83% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 18.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 21.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -14.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 39.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 87.4% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 48.7% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 57.25 to 45.88. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 74.5% and 63.8%.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Claude 4.1 Opus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 63.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.