Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

57.44/100
Margin
0.2pts
← winning
57.25/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking #69 (Estimated); Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Pro share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking; 10 to Gemini 2.5 Pro.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
14
Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking only
2
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
10
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Pro is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Gemini 2.5 Pro has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking.

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 Opus 4.5 Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Pro
CategoryClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingΔGemini 2.5 Pro
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro63.8
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro27.4
MathClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 Pro11.6

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableGemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableGemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableGemini 2.5 Pro21.19 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.5 Thinking200KGemini 2.5 Pro1MGemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 89.5%54.1%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 7.1%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 42.01%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 8.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 665Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 20.63%0.40%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-SciCodeSource 49.5%42.8%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 63.8%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-LCRSource 74.0%66.0%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
CritPtSource 4.6%2.6%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 40.8%25.8%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 86.6%84.4%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-HLESource 28.4%21.1%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 13.3%-14.3%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 45.7%39.0%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 59.8%87.4%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA MMLU-ProSource 89.5%Not comparable
GPQASource 83%Not comparable
HLESource 18.8%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 14.138%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource 91.3%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 74.0%74.9%Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12771197Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGemini 2.5 ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 58.0%48.7%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Pro on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Pro today?

Gemini 2.5 Pro: $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 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.