Model Comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
vs. Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
Comparing 2 AI models · 4 benchmarks · Google, Anthropic
Recommended Pick
AnClaude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)7 metric winsStrongest on: Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding
Best Value
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
100.0 value score
46.7 reasoning / $0.85/1M
Lowest Price
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
$0.30/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
70.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
77.0 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is 16.7x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort).
Speed gap
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite generates about 6.8x as many tokens per second as Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) leads Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite by 23.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) leads Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite by 27.7 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
Anthropic
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 | Go Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Top Pick An Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $5.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.50/1M | $25.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.85/1M | $10.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | |
| Release Date | Jul 21, 2026 | Jul 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 364.3 tok/s | 53.5 tok/s |
| TTFT | 8145ms | 18850ms |
| Latency | 8145ms | 18850ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 12.8 |
| Reasoning Score | 46.7 | 70.2 |
| Intelligence | 37.4 | 62.5 |
| Coding | 49.3 | 77.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 83.8% | 93.7% |
| HLE | 18.8% | 54.4% |
| SciCode | 40.9% | 55.0% |
| LCR | 74.7% | 76.3% |
Key Takeaways
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite offers the best value at $0.30/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 70.2 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) reaches a 77.0 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
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
