Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Agent Arenaagent-2026-08-31-011508720696 · outcome_score · leader | 11.61100% of row best · score · Claude Opus 5 (Max); 95% CI [9.58391463, 13.64552719]; sessions 17073; observations 2093237; rank 2 | -10.8180% of row best · score · Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite; 95% CI [-12.19929495, -9.42408695]; sessions 22348; observations 634592; rank 51 |
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,504.96100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-5-max; 95% CI [1499.16488972, 1510.76500615]; votes 16839; rank 1 | 1,436.2595% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-lite; 95% CI [1431.05053629, 1441.44358777]; votes 21843; rank 74 |
| LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader | 83.44100% of row best · percent · claude-opus-5-max-effort · 14,826 output tokens / case | 66.3580% of row best · percent · gemini-3.5-flash-lite-high · 11,526 output tokens / case |
| ToneBench2026-08-14-10-task · overall_score · leader | 90.37100% of row best · points · Claude Opus 5 (max effort) · 2,832 output tokens / case | 74.3082% of row best · points · Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite · 2,022 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 4 benchmark winsOverall lead | 0 benchmark wins |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Google DeepMind |
| Family | Claude 5 | Gemini 3 |
| Model | Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
| Version | Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-07-24 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video, Audio, Document |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000,000 | 1,048,576 |
| Total parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | Unknown |
| Open weights | No | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | No |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Google AI (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
13 comparable fields · 7 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Claude Opus 5 Capabilities
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
Gemini 3 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs |  GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite FAQs
Is Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+
Claude Opus 5 is $5.00 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is $0.30 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 5 is $25.00 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is $2.50 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 5 supports 1,000,000 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite supports 1,048,576.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+
Claude Opus 5 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 4 protocol-matched benchmarks from 3 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.
Can Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Opus 5 is not marked open weight; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is not marked open weight.
Can Claude Opus 5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite understand images?+
Claude Opus 5 is documented with image input; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+
Claude Opus 5 has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Opus 5 supports 128,000 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite supports 65,536 output tokens.
Do Claude Opus 5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Opus 5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+
Claude Opus 5 has 3 sourced provider routes; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has 1, so Claude Opus 5 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Opus 5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?+
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.