Model Comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
vs. Gemini 2.5 Pro
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Anthropic, Google
Recommended Pick
GoGemini 2.5 Pro14 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Math
Lowest Price
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Gemini 2.5 Pro
70.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
36.4 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Gemini 2.5 Pro.
Reasoning gap
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) by 17.4 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) leads Gemini 2.5 Pro by 3.1 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Gemini 2.5 Pro wins 14 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Math, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Gemini 2.5 Pro
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) | Top Pick Go Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $1.25/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $10.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $3.44/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | |
| Release Date | Feb 24, 2025 | Jun 5, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 138.4 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 15544ms |
| Latency | — | 15544ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 52.9 | 70.3 |
| Intelligence | 27.1 | 25.8 |
| Coding | 36.4 | 33.3 |
| Math | 56.3 | 87.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 77.2% | 84.4% |
| MMLU Pro | 83.7% | 86.2% |
| HLE | 10.3% | 21.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 47.3% | 80.1% |
| MATH 500 | 94.7% | 96.7% |
| AIME 2025 | 56.3% | 87.7% |
| AIME (Original) | 48.7% | 88.7% |
| SciCode | 40.3% | 42.8% |
| LCR | 60.7% | 66.0% |
| IFBench | 48.3% | 48.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 54.7% | 54.1% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 21.2% | 26.5% |
Key Takeaways
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Gemini 2.5 Pro has the strongest reasoning profile with a 70.3 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) reaches a 36.4 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
Gemini 2.5 Pro
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
