Claude Opus 4.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro

Model Markets Rankings

Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency

All rankings →
RankingClaude Opus 4.5Gemini 3.1 Pro
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#34 of 36$0.380 per LiveBench case#22 of 36$0.161 per LiveBench case

Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemini 3.1 Pro
LMArena Document Arenadocument-2026-07-30-011508720696 · arena_rating · statistical tie1,461.65100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-5-20251101; 95% CI [1451.22442739, 1472.08183979]; votes 7965; rank 191,445.3299% of row best · rating · gemini-3.1-pro-preview; 95% CI [1439.35538449, 1451.29339146]; votes 45162; rank 23
LMArena Search Arenasearch-2026-08-24-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,179.6497% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-5-search; 95% CI [1174.02872051, 1185.26030035]; votes 61573; rank 191,210.46100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.1-pro-grounding; 95% CI [1205.32063396, 1215.60669852]; votes 113282; rank 9
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,447.1998% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-5-20251101-high-32k; 95% CI [1443.28922560, 1451.09589305]; votes 36271; rank 461,480.10100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.1-pro-preview; 95% CI [1476.89767236, 1483.30025658]; votes 102763; rank 11
LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader77.3995% of row best · percent · claude-opus-4-5-20251101-thinking-64k-high-effort · 15,203 output tokens / case81.66100% of row best · percent · gemini-3.1-pro-preview-high · 13,380 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 1 tie0 benchmark wins3 benchmark winsOverall lead

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

FieldAt a Glance
Anthropic · activeClaude Opus 4.5Verified Sep 3, 2026
Google DeepMind · previewGemini 3.1 ProVerified Aug 29, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldClaude Opus 4.5Gemini 3.1 Pro
DeveloperAnthropicGoogle DeepMind
FamilyClaude 4Gemini 3
ModelClaude Opus 4.5Gemini 3.1 Pro
VersionClaude Opus 4.5Gemini 3.1 Pro
Lifecycleactivepreview
Released2025-11-24Unknown
Knowledge cutoff2025-05-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video, Audio, Document
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window200K1,049K
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard)Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

13 comparable fields · 9 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Claude Opus 4.5 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$5.00
Output price$25.00
Serving providers1
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-opus-4-5

Gemini 3.1 Pro Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$2.00
Output price$12.00
Serving providers2
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-3.1-pro-preview

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All text comparisons →
APairBContext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro FAQs

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?+

Claude Opus 4.5 is $5.00 and Gemini 3.1 Pro is $2.00 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.1 Pro is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.5 is $25.00 and Gemini 3.1 Pro is $12.00 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.1 Pro is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?+

Gemini 3.1 Pro has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 4.5 supports 200K and Gemini 3.1 Pro supports 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?+

Gemini 3.1 Pro leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 4 protocol-matched benchmarks from 2 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.

Can Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Opus 4.5 is not marked open weight; Gemini 3.1 Pro is not marked open weight.

Can Claude Opus 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro understand images?+

Claude Opus 4.5 is documented with image input; Gemini 3.1 Pro is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?+

Gemini 3.1 Pro has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Opus 4.5 supports 64K and Gemini 3.1 Pro supports 66K output tokens.

Do Claude Opus 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Opus 4.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Gemini 3.1 Pro: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?+

Claude Opus 4.5 has 1 sourced provider route; Gemini 3.1 Pro has 2, so Gemini 3.1 Pro has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback