Which model is better: Claude 4 Opus or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 98.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.30 vs. $15.00 per 1M tokens) and $2.50 vs. $75.00 for output tokens (50.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 2.5 Flash delivers lower response latency at 110ms TTFT (810ms faster than Claude 4 Opus) with 180 vs. 46 tok/s throughput. Claude 4 Opus leads coding evaluations at 77.2% SWE-bench Verified vs. 58.0% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 87.1% vs. 70.5% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude 4 Opus
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$15.00
$0.30
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 50.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$75.00
$2.50
Gemini 2.5 Flash (96.7% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$1.500
$0.030
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 50.0x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$18.75
$0.30
Gemini 2.5 Flash is 62.5x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (64k out)
1,049k (66k out)
Gemini 2.5 Flash (5.1x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
920ms
110ms
Gemini 2.5 Flash (810ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
46 tok/s
180 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Flash (+134 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
77.2%
58%
Claude 4 Opus (+19.2% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
87.1%
70.5%
Claude 4 Opus (+16.6% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
91.8%
82%
Claude 4 Opus (+9.8% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98.1%
89%
Claude 4 Opus (+9.1% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
43.6 / 100
66.6 / 100
Gemini 2.5 Flash (+23 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Which is cheaper: Claude 4 Opus or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30/1M input tokens ($2.50/1M output) compared to $15.00/1M input ($75.00/1M output) for Claude 4 Opus.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 4 Opus or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash delivers faster first-token latency at 110ms TTFT (180 tok/s throughput) compared to 920ms TTFT (46 tok/s) for Claude 4 Opus.
How do Claude 4 Opus and Gemini 2.5 Flash compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 4 Opus scores 77.2% versus 58% for Gemini 2.5 Flash. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 4 Opus scores 87.1% versus 70.5% for Gemini 2.5 Flash (and 98.1% vs 89% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude 4 Opus?
Choose Claude 4 Opus (Anthropic) for mission-critical R&D, long-horizon autonomous coding tasks, complex theorem proving, and executive strategic synthesis — offering a 204k context window, 920ms TTFT, and $15.00/1M input pricing ($1.500/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash (Google) for cost-efficient 1M-context summarization, multimodal extraction, and interactive assistants — offering a 1,048k context window, 110ms TTFT, and $0.30/1M input pricing ($0.030/1M cached reads).
