Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic |  Gemini 3.5 Flash LiteGoogle DeepMind |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #24 of 4660.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete | #39 of 4617.6 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #31 of 44$0.198 per LiveBench case | #8 of 44$0.029 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #31 of 3847.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete | #32 of 3846.2 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $3.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.30Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $15.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $2.50Google 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 Sonnet 4.6 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-1verified-v1-ba05d69f6453 · verified_score · leader | 86.50100% of row best · percent · Claude Sonnet 4.6 (High) | 53.5062% of row best · percent · Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (High) |
| ARC-AGI-2verified-v2-6c676fa3e9af · verified_score · leader | 60.42100% of row best · percent · Claude Sonnet 4.6 (High) | 10.2817% of row best · percent · Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (High) |
| LMArena Agent Arenaagent-2026-09-15-d25aabda0010 · outcome_score · leader | -1.52100% of row best · score · Claude Sonnet 4.6; 95% CI [-2.63863180, -0.39612153]; sessions 39452; observations 1444102; rank 31 | -15.3586% of row best · score · Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite; 95% CI [-16.65525683, -14.04242266]; sessions 23248; observations 670178; rank 45 |
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,458.26100% of row best · rating · claude-sonnet-4-6; 95% CI [1454.67519650, 1461.85096774]; votes 66208; rank 35 | 1,435.5498% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-lite; 95% CI [1430.59505493, 1440.49024696]; votes 26165; rank 79 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · statistical tie | 1,282.72100% of row best · rating · claude-sonnet-4-6; 95% CI [1276.36460283, 1289.07266013]; votes 25552; rank 27 | 1,268.4299% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-lite; 95% CI [1258.88097193, 1277.96729164]; votes 5254; rank 37 |
| LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader | 77.11100% of row best · percent · claude-sonnet-4-6-thinking-auto-medium-effort · 13,226 output tokens / case | 66.3586% of row best · percent · gemini-3.5-flash-lite-high · 11,526 output tokens / case |
| ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified | 83.63100% of row best · points · Claude Sonnet 4.6 · 18,675 output tokens / case | 73.4288% of row best · points · Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite · 1,966 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 1 tie | 5 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.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Google DeepMind |
| Family | Claude 4 | Gemini 3 |
| Model | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
| Version | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-02-17 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-08-01 | 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, generation, reasoning, tools |
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Capabilities
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs | Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite FAQs
Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is $3.00 and Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is $0.30 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper on this metric. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is $15.00 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 Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has the larger sourced context window. Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 1,000K and Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite supports 1,049K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 6 protocol-matched benchmarks from 3 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.
Can Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is not marked open weight; Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is not marked open weight.
Can Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite understand images?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 128K and Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite supports 66K output tokens.
Do Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 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 Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite?+
Claude Sonnet 4.6 has 2 sourced provider routes; Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has 2, a tie.
Which offers better value, Claude Sonnet 4.6 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.