Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.61/100
No comparison
N/A
1 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.5 #96 (Estimated); Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite share 2 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.5; 19 to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
2
Claude Sonnet 4.5 only
10
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
19
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Claude Sonnet 4.5 makes more sense if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the better fit if reasoning is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 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 Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite. That is roughly 6.0x on output cost alone. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Sonnet 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 scores and score margins for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
CategoryClaude Sonnet 4.5ΔGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
ReasoningClaude Sonnet 4.513.6Margin→ 58.6Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.577.2Margin← 23.0Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2
AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.555.4Margin→ 8.0Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.583.4MarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured
MathClaude Sonnet 4.511.2MarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Sonnet 4.5B · Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

  1. OSWorld-Verified

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 61.4%B 74%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 12.6
    OSWorld-Verified: Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 61.4%; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 74%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.

  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 50%B 54%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 4
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 50%; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 4.5$3 input / $15 outputGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 outputGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 4.5Not availableGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 4.5Not availableGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 4.5200KGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1MGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 50%54%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 61.4%74%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
VITA-BenchSource 17.0%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 48.51%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 27.7%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1140Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —26.8%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —32.0%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource —634Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource —16.5%Not comparable
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.2%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —54.0%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource —54.2%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —49.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource —40.9%Not comparable
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 13.6%—Not comparable
MRCRv2Source —72.2%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource —62.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource —0.0%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
GPQASource 83.4%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource —36.5%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource —83.8%Not comparable
AA-HLESource —17.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource —6.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource —30.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource —33.5%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
AIME 2025Source 87%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 13.495%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1219—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —79.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 54.2. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for reasoning, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 13.6. Claude Sonnet 4.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 55.4. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 21, 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.