Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 19 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); 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 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share 19 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 40 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 5 to Gemini 2.5 Pro.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 19
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 40
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 5
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Claude Opus 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Pro only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 19 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Opus 4.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 64.22 to 57.25. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Opus 4.5's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 57.5 against 11.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 80.9% to 63.8%.
Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 2.5 Pro. That is roughly 2.5x on output cost alone. Gemini 2.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
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 Opus 4.5 | Δ | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Opus 4.557.5 | Margin← 45.9 | Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.558.1 | Margin← 30.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.571.7 | Margin← 7.9 | Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.562.6 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.564.4 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured |
| Multilingual | Claude Opus 4.585.7 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.569.9 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.569.5 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 80.9%B 63.8%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 17.1SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 80.9%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 63.8%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 30.8%B 18.8%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 12HLE: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 30.8%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 18.8%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 20.690%B 14.138%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 6.6FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Opus 4.5 scored 20.690%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 14.138%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 87%B 83%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 4GPQA: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 87%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 83%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 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 Opus 4.546 tok/s | Gemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/s | Gemini 2.5 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.51.01 s | Gemini 2.5 Pro21.19 s | Claude Opus 4.5 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5200K | Gemini 2.5 Pro1M | Gemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic19 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.6% | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 23.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | 26.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 42.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | 71.8% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 76.4% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 50.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | 54.1% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.23% | 42.01% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| JobBenchSource | 32.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 7.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 8.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 665 | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.9% | 63.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 84.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 77.5% | — | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 47.0% | 42.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 0.40% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.5 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | 83% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 96.6% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 30.8% | 18.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 34.7% | 25.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.0% | 84.4% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 12.9% | 21.1% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -3.9% | -14.3% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.7% | 39.0% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.4% | 87.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 88.9% | — | Not comparable |
MathClaude Opus 4.5 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 95.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 93.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 84.0% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 20.690% | 14.138% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.167% | 4.167% | Tie |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | 74.3% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 68.5% | — | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 45.7% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 67.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 71.2% | 74.9% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1277 | 1197 | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 64.22 to 57.25. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 80.9% and 63.8%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.1 versus 27.4. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 63.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 57.5 versus 11.6. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) 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.