Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude 4.1 Opus
51
Gemini 2.5 Pro
64
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.
Coding
+10.7 difference
Claude 4.1 Opus
Gemini 2.5 Pro
$15 / $75
$1.25 / $10
29 t/s
117 t/s
1.66s
21.19s
200K
1M
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.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 64 to 51. 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.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 64 to 51. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 74.5% and 63.8%.
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.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.