Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

65.07/100
Margin
17.0pts
← winning
48.09/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.6 #32 (Supported); Gemini 2.5 Flash #130 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash share 15 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.6; 0 to Gemini 2.5 Flash.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
15
Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
18
Gemini 2.5 Flash only
0
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude Sonnet 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Flash 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 15 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 1 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 4.6 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 65.07 to 48.09. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Sonnet 4.6's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 26.4 against 4.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 32.400% to 4.844%.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 2.5 Flash. That is roughly 6.0x on output cost alone. Gemini 2.5 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Sonnet 4.6.

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 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash
CategoryClaude Sonnet 4.6ΔGemini 2.5 Flash
MathClaude Sonnet 4.626.4Margin← 21.7Gemini 2.5 Flash4.7
AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.665.2MarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 FlashNot measured
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.669.1MarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 FlashNot measured
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.666.0MarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 FlashNot measured
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 4.677.4MarginNo overlapGemini 2.5 FlashNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Sonnet 4.6B · Gemini 2.5 Flash

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 32.400%B 4.844%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 27.6
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 32.400%; Gemini 2.5 Flash scored 4.844%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 8.300%B 4.167%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 4.1
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 8.300%; Gemini 2.5 Flash scored 4.167%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6$3 input / $15 outputGemini 2.5 Flash$0.3 input / $2.5 outputGemini 2.5 Flash has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 4.644 tok/sGemini 2.5 Flash221 tok/sGemini 2.5 Flash has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 4.61.48 sGemini 2.5 Flash0.50 sGemini 2.5 Flash reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6200KGemini 2.5 Flash1MGemini 2.5 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 72.1%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 67.8%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource 65.2%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 79.5%14.9%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Gert LabsSource 62.92%—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 8.3%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 36.9%—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79.6%—Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource 60.7%—Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 80.6%—Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 51.48%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 48.8%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 46.9%29.1%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 24.3%—Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashResult
AA-LCRSource 57.7%45.9%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
CritPtSource 0.9%1.4%Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashResult
GPQASource 89.9%—Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 95%—Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 79.2%—Not comparable
HLESource 49%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 35.9%14.1%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 79.9%68.3%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-HLESource 13.2%5.1%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -2.9%-42.0%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 38.0%26.5%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 65.9%93.3%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
MathClaude Sonnet 4.6 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 32.400%4.844%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 8.300%4.167%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashResult
CharXivSource 77.4%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 70.6%65.5%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 13171148Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashResult
AA-IFBenchSource 41.2%39.0%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.07 to 48.09. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 32.400% and 4.844%.

Which is better for math, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 26.4 versus 4.7. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) 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 20, 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.