Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic |  Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #12 of 4676.2 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #33 of 44$0.241 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #19 of 3853.2 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $5.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $1.25Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $25.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $10.00Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 1,049K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 29, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Document Arenadocument-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,507.05100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-6; 95% CI [1501.18336037, 1512.92390326]; votes 41260; rank 4 | 1,421.2394% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro; 95% CI [1414.98072895, 1427.48825137]; votes 25110; rank 36 |
| LMArena Search Arenasearch-2026-08-24-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,253.42100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-6-search; 95% CI [1248.44594166, 1258.38585709]; votes 134699; rank 2 | 1,141.6591% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro-grounding; 95% CI [1137.05776179, 1146.24105969]; votes 83404; rank 27 |
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,497.54100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-6; 95% CI [1494.14263199, 1500.94441396]; votes 75878; rank 5 | 1,457.7797% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro; 95% CI [1455.30542635, 1460.23799206]; votes 122554; rank 36 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,311.54100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-6; 95% CI [1305.06259741, 1318.02420613]; votes 25140; rank 9 | 1,262.1796% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro; 95% CI [1257.50456844, 1266.82595195]; votes 87635; rank 45 |
| ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified | 84.21100% of row best · points · Claude Opus 4.6 · 13,556 output tokens / case | 78.2793% of row best · points · Gemini 2.5 Pro · 4,521 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 4 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Google DeepMind |
| Family | Claude 4 | Gemini 2 5 |
| Model | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| Version | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-02-05 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-05-01 | 2025-01-01 |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video, Audio, Document |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 1,049K |
| 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) | Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Claude Opus 4.6 Capabilities
Gemini 2.5 Pro Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs | Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro FAQs
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Pro, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+
Claude Opus 4.6 is $5.00 and Gemini 2.5 Pro is $1.25 per million tokens, so Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.6 is $25.00 and Gemini 2.5 Pro is $10.00 per million tokens, so Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+
Gemini 2.5 Pro has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1,000K and Gemini 2.5 Pro supports 1,049K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Opus 4.6 is not marked open weight; Gemini 2.5 Pro is not marked open weight.
Can Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Pro understand images?+
Claude Opus 4.6 is documented with image input; Gemini 2.5 Pro is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+
Claude Opus 4.6 has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Opus 4.6 supports 128K and Gemini 2.5 Pro supports 66K output tokens.
Do Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Pro support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Opus 4.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Gemini 2.5 Pro: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?+
Claude Opus 4.6 has 1 sourced provider route; Gemini 2.5 Pro has 2, so Gemini 2.5 Pro has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 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.