Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 4 Sonnet vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

42.79/100
Margin
14.5pts
winning →
57.25/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4 Sonnet #158 (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 Sonnet and Gemini 2.5 Pro share 15 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 4 Sonnet; 9 to Gemini 2.5 Pro.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
15
Claude 4 Sonnet only
1
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
9
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 6 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 42.79. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude 4 Sonnet is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Pro. Gemini 2.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4 Sonnet.

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 scores and score margins for Claude 4 Sonnet and Gemini 2.5 Pro
CategoryClaude 4 SonnetΔGemini 2.5 Pro
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet72.7Margin 8.9Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8
KnowledgeClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro27.4
MathClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro11.6

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude 4 SonnetB · Gemini 2.5 Pro
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 72.7%B 63.8%
    Winner: Claude 4 SonnetΔ 8.9
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4 Sonnet scored 72.7%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 63.8%. Claude 4 Sonnet wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4 Sonnet$3 input / $15 outputGemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 outputGemini 2.5 Pro has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4 Sonnet40 tok/sGemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/sGemini 2.5 Pro has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4 Sonnet1.33 sGemini 2.5 Pro21.19 sClaude 4 Sonnet reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4 Sonnet200KGemini 2.5 Pro1MGemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 52.3%54.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gert LabsSource 39.66%42.01%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
JobBenchSource 18.4%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 7.1%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 8.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 665Not comparable
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet wins
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 72.7%63.8%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
AA-SciCodeSource 37.3%42.8%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 0.40%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-LCRSource 44.3%66.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
CritPtSource 1.1%2.6%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.5%25.8%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 68.3%84.4%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-HLESource 4.0%21.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -9.2%-14.3%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 22.4%39.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 40.8%87.4%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
GPQASource 83%Not comparable
HLESource 18.8%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 14.138%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 62.4%74.9%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 11781199Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 45.4%48.7%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude 4 Sonnet or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 57.25 to 42.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72.7% and 63.8%.

Which is better for coding, Claude 4 Sonnet or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude 4 Sonnet has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.7 versus 63.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 20, 2026

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.