Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic |  Gemini 3.8 FlashGoogle DeepMind |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #11 of 4679.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete | #8 of 4682.0 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 54.7–88.0 |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #37 of 44$0.286 per LiveBench case | #26 of 44$0.160 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #20 of 3852.7 score · 3/3 sources · complete | #8 of 3860.4 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 46.7–63.4 |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $5.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.75Google AI ↗ · Sep 2, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $25.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $3.75Google AI ↗ · Sep 2, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 1,049K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 2, 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 4.7 | Gemini 3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · statistical tie | 1,483.3699% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7; 95% CI [1479.49740558, 1487.21455301]; votes 61128; rank 12 | 1,494.67100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.8-flash-high; 95% CI [1486.13928353, 1503.20869643]; votes 5076; rank 6 |
| LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader | 80.97100% of row best · percent · claude-opus-4-7-xhigh-effort · 11,460 output tokens / case | 80.85100% of row best · percent · gemini-3.8-flash-high · 42,786 output tokens / case |
| ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified | 85.49100% of row best · points · Claude Opus 4.7 · 4,840 output tokens / case | 77.8291% of row best · points · Gemini 3.8 Flash (high thinking) · 13,616 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 1 tie | 1 benchmark winNo 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 4.7 | Gemini 3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Google DeepMind |
| Family | Claude 4 | Gemini 3 |
| Model | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 3.8 Flash |
| Version | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 3.8 Flash |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-04-16 | 2026-09-02 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-01-01 | Unknown |
| 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), Deepinfra (Standard) | Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, code_execution, computer_use, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
Claude Opus 4.7 Capabilities
Gemini 3.8 Flash Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs | Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash FAQs
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 3.8 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?+
Claude Opus 4.7 is $5.00 and Gemini 3.8 Flash is $0.75 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.8 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.7 is $25.00 and Gemini 3.8 Flash is $3.75 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.8 Flash is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?+
Gemini 3.8 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1,000K and Gemini 3.8 Flash supports 1,049K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Opus 4.7 is not marked open weight; Gemini 3.8 Flash is not marked open weight.
Can Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 3.8 Flash understand images?+
Claude Opus 4.7 is documented with image input; Gemini 3.8 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?+
Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Opus 4.7 supports 128K and Gemini 3.8 Flash supports 66K output tokens.
Do Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 3.8 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Opus 4.7: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Gemini 3.8 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?+
Claude Opus 4.7 has 2 sourced provider routes; Gemini 3.8 Flash has 2, a tie.
Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?+
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.