Skip to main content

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) vs Gemini 3.5 Flash

Head-to-head comparison across 5benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)

90

VS

Gemini 3.5 Flash

87

3 categoriesvs2 categories

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) #5 · Gemini 3.5 Flash #6

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Category Radar

Head-to-Head by Category

Category Breakdown

Agentic

Gemini 3.5 Flash
74.9vs77.2

+2.3 difference

Coding

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
72.9vs54.5

+18.4 difference

Reasoning

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
75.8vs74.7

+1.1 difference

Knowledge

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
68.2vs58

+10.2 difference

Multimodal

Gemini 3.5 Flash
64.3vs83.8

+19.5 difference

Operational Comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Price (per 1M tokens)

$5 / $25

$1.5 / $9

Speed

N/A

284.2 t/s

Latency (TTFT)

N/A

18.55s

Context Window

1M

1M

Quick Verdict

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 90 versus 87. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)'s sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 72.9 against 54.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 54.7% to 40.2%. Gemini 3.5 Flash does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.50 input / $9.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.5 Flash. That is roughly 2.8x on output cost alone.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 90 to 87. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 54.7% and 40.2%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.2 versus 58. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.9 versus 54.5. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 75.8 versus 74.7. Inside this category, ARC-AGI-2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 74.9. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 64.3. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: May 19, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.