Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Gemini 3 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 23 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 3 Pro #19 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and Gemini 3 Pro share 23 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 36 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 4 to Gemini 3 Pro.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 23
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 36
- Gemini 3 Pro only
- 4
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Gemini 3 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if reasoning is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 23 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
Gemini 3 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 67.73 to 64.22. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3 Pro's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 81.1 against 69.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 20.690% to 37.600%. Claude Opus 4.5 does hit back in reasoning, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3 Pro. That is roughly 2.1x on output cost alone. Gemini 3 Pro gives you the larger context window at 2M, 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 3 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.564.4 | Margin← 33.3 | Gemini 3 Pro31.1 |
| Math | Claude Opus 4.557.5 | Margin← 24.6 | Gemini 3 Pro32.9 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.569.9 | Margin→ 11.2 | Gemini 3 Pro81.1 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.562.6 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 ProNot measured |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.571.7 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 ProNot measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.558.1 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 ProNot measured |
| Multilingual | Claude Opus 4.585.7 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 ProNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.569.5 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3 ProNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 20.690%B 37.600%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 16.9FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Opus 4.5 scored 20.690%; Gemini 3 Pro scored 37.600%. Gemini 3 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 4.167%B 18.750%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 14.6FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Opus 4.5 scored 4.167%; Gemini 3 Pro scored 18.750%. Gemini 3 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 68.5%B 81.4%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 12.9CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 68.5%; Gemini 3 Pro scored 81.4%. Gemini 3 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 70.6%B 81%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 10.4MMMU-Pro: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 70.6%; Gemini 3 Pro scored 81%. Gemini 3 Pro 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 3 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 output | Gemini 3 Pro$2 input / $12 output | Gemini 3 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.546 tok/s | Gemini 3 Pro109 tok/s | Gemini 3 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.51.01 s | Gemini 3 Pro32.65 s | Claude Opus 4.5 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5200K | Gemini 3 Pro2M | Gemini 3 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 3 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% | 87.1% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.23% | 63.23% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| JobBenchSource | 32.3% | 11.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
Coding8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 3 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.9% | — | Not comparable |
| 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% | 56.1% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 14.30% | Not comparable |
| AA LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 91.7% | Not comparable |
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.5 wins5 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 3 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | — | Not comparable |
| 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% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 34.7% | 39.5% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.0% | 90.8% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 12.9% | 37.2% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -3.9% | 15.8% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.7% | 55.9% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.4% | 90.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 88.9% | 89.8% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
MathClaude Opus 4.5 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 3 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% | 37.600% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.167% | 18.750% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
Multilingual3 benchmarks
MultimodalGemini 3 Pro wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Gemini 3 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 70.6% | 81% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| MathVisionSource | 74.3% | 86.6% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| CharXivSource | 68.5% | 81.4% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.4% | 87.6% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 45.7% | 72.7% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| V*Source | 67.0% | 88.0% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 71.2% | 80.2% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1279 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3 Pro?
Gemini 3 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.73 to 64.22. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 20.690% and 37.600%.
Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 57.5 versus 32.9. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for reasoning, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 64.4 versus 31.1. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3 Pro?
Gemini 3 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.1 versus 69.9. Inside this category, ScreenSpot Pro 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.