BenchLM comparison
Claude vs Gemini (July 2026): Benchmarks, Price & Verdict
The closest matchup in AI: Gemini 3.1 Pro edges the overall BenchLM score 89 to 88, but Claude Fable 5holds the top Arena Elo (1508.5) and a huge coding lead — 95 vs 75 on SWE-bench Verified. Pick Claude for coding and writing; pick Gemini for price, at a fifth of Claude's API cost.
This page compares Claude and Gemini as products, anchored to the flagship models behind each app: Claude runs on Anthropic's Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 4.8, and Claude Sonnet 5, while Gemini runs on Google's Gemini 3.1 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash. Every number below is BenchLM's sourced benchmark or pricing data for those specific models.
Phrase it as "Claude vs Gemini" or "Gemini vs Claude" — either way you are asking about the two highest-scoring model families on our leaderboard, separated by a single point at the top. That makes this the matchup where the details matter most.
The short answer
By the headline number, this is effectively a tie: Gemini 3.1 Pro scores 89 overall on BenchLM to Claude Fable 5's 88. But the two models get there in very different ways, and the split decides which one you should use.
Claude Fable 5 dominates coding and human preference. It posts 95 on SWE-bench Verified against Gemini 3.1 Pro's 75, leads Terminal-Bench 2 (84.3 vs 77), and its 1508.5 Arena Elo is the highest human-preference rating BenchLM tracks — nearly 23 points clear of Gemini 3.1 Pro's 1485.8. It is also the only model here rated at a 1M+ context window. Gemini 3.1 Pro counters on breadth: 97 on MATH-500, 92 on BBH, 95 on IFEval, and standout multilingual scores (96 on MGSM), which is how it edges the overall aggregate.
Then there is price, where the gap is enormous. Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2 input / $12 output per million tokens; Claude Fable 5 costs $10 / $50 — five times the input price for one point less on the aggregate. Even Claude's cheaper tiers ($5 / $25 for Opus 4.8, $2 / $10 introductory for Sonnet 5) only reach parity with Google's flagship rate. If your work is code or prose, pay for Claude; for almost everything else, Gemini is the better deal.
Claude vs Gemini: the models behind the apps
Here are the current flagships side by side. BenchLM scores are our sourced overall benchmark aggregate; Arena Elo is the human-preference rating where one has been published. Unusually for a flagship matchup, every model on both sides is fully benchmarked.
| Model | BenchLM score | Arena Elo | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Fable 5Anthropic | 88 | 1508.5 | 1M+ |
| Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic | 81 | 1476.5 | 1M |
| Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic | 82 | — | 1M |
| Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle | 89 | 1485.8 | 1M |
| Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle | 75 | 1479.5 | 1M |
For the benchmark-by-benchmark detail, the dedicated model comparison pages go deeper: Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro is the flagship matchup, and Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash covers the value tiers.
Claude vs Gemini pricing: subscriptions and API
Neither product anchors to ChatGPT's $20/month reference point in quite the same way. Anthropic sells Claude Proin the standard consumer price band, with usage caps that reflect how expensive Fable 5 is to serve, and higher Max tiers for heavy users. Google bundles Gemini's top models into its paid Google AI subscription tiers alongside Workspace and storage perks, and its free tier is the most generous of the major assistants.
The API is where you can compare exactly — and where Gemini vs Claude stops being close. Google's flagship costs a fifth of Anthropic's on input tokens, and Gemini 3.5 Flash is the cheapest model on this page. Full rate cards live on the Anthropic API pricing and Google API pricing hubs.
| Model | Input / 1M tokens | Output / 1M tokens | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Fable 5 | $10.00 | $50.00 | — |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | $5.00 | $25.00 | — |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | $2.00 | $10.00 | Introductory rate through Aug 31, 2026; $3 / $15 standard |
| Gemini 3.1 Pro | $2.00 | $12.00 | Rises to $4 / $18 above 200K-token prompts |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | $1.50 | $9.00 | — |
Which should you pick?
Pick Claude if…
- Coding is the job: Claude Fable 5's 95 on SWE-bench Verified and 84.3 on Terminal-Bench 2 lead Gemini 3.1 Pro's 75 and 77 by wide margins.
- Writing quality matters — Fable 5's 1508.5 Arena Elo is the top human-preference score BenchLM tracks, well ahead of Gemini 3.1 Pro's 1485.8.
- You need the biggest context: Fable 5 is the only model here rated at 1M+ tokens.
- Agentic reliability counts — Fable 5 posts 98.5 on tau2-bench and 85 on OSWorld Verified, both ahead of Gemini 3.1 Pro (95.6 and 68).
- You want a strong value tier: Claude Sonnet 5 (82 overall, 85.2 SWE-bench Verified) is $2 / $10 on introductory pricing through August 31, 2026.
Pick Gemini if…
- You want the highest overall benchmark aggregate — Gemini 3.1 Pro's 89 edges every Claude model, including Fable 5's 88.
- Price decides it: $2 / $12 per million tokens versus $10 / $50 for Fable 5 — a fifth of the input cost for one aggregate point.
- Math and structured reasoning are the workload: 97 on MATH-500, 92 on BBH, and 93 on MuSR lead this matchup.
- You work multilingually — Gemini 3.1 Pro posts 96 on MGSM and 93 on MMLU-ProX.
- You want a genuinely good budget tier: Gemini 3.5 Flash scores 75 overall at $1.50 / $9, with an Arena Elo (1479.5) above Claude Opus 4.8's.
How this comparison works
BenchLM compares products through the models that power them — the Claude app and the Gemini app each swap in new flagship models several times a year, so a product verdict is only as current as the models behind it. Overall scores are our sourced benchmark aggregate; Arena Elo is the community human-preference rating where one has been published; API prices come from each provider's official rate card as recorded in BenchLM's pricing data. Individual benchmark scores quoted in the text — SWE-bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2, MATH-500, tau2-bench and the rest — come from the same sourced dataset that powers every model comparison page on the site.
Claude vs Gemini FAQ
Is Claude better than Gemini?
It depends on the yardstick. Gemini 3.1 Pro edges the overall BenchLM aggregate 89 to 88, but Claude Fable 5 wins the measures most people feel day to day: the top Arena Elo we track (1508.5 vs 1485.8), a 20-point lead on SWE-bench Verified (95 vs 75), and the larger 1M+ context window. Call it a split decision that Claude wins on depth and Gemini wins on breadth.
Is Claude cheaper than Gemini?
No — Gemini is much cheaper at every comparable tier. Claude Fable 5 costs $10 input / $50 output per million tokens against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro, and Gemini 3.5 Flash ($1.50 / $9) undercuts every Claude model. The closest Claude gets is Sonnet 5's introductory $2 / $10 rate, which matches Gemini 3.1 Pro's input price until August 31, 2026, when it reverts to $3 / $15.
Which is better for coding, Claude or Gemini?
Claude, clearly, on the sourced data. Claude Fable 5 posts 95 on SWE-bench Verified and 84.3 on Terminal-Bench 2; Gemini 3.1 Pro manages 75 and 77 on the same tests. Even Claude's mid-tier Sonnet 5 (85.2 SWE-bench Verified) out-codes Google's flagship. Gemini's coding case is economic: at $2 / $12 it is far cheaper per token for bulk code generation where top-end agentic accuracy is not critical.
Can I use both Claude and Gemini?
Yes — this pairing is arguably the most complementary of the big three. Claude covers coding, writing, and long-context work, where Fable 5's numbers lead; Gemini covers math, multilingual tasks, and high-volume everyday queries at a fraction of the token cost, with a generous free tier. Many teams route exactly this way on the API: Claude for the hard agentic coding path, Gemini 3.5 Flash for everything cheap and fast.