← All Comparisons
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash
A detailed comparison of Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic) and Gemini 2.5 Flash (Google) across pricing, performance, and features.
Pricing Comparison
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $3.00 | $0.15 | -95% |
| Output / 1M tokens | $15.00 | $0.60 | -96% |
| Context window | 200K | 1M | — |
| Max output | 16K | 65.536K | — |
Benchmark Comparison
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 86% | 76% |
| HumanEval | 94% | 89.5% |
| GPQA | 70% | — |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| code | ✓ | ✓ |
| reasoning | ✓ | ✓ |
| text | ✓ | ✓ |
| tool-use | ✓ | ✓ |
| vision | ✓ | ✓ |
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Strengths
- ✓Opus 4.5 quality at 1/5th the cost
- ✓Best value for production workloads
- ✓1M context in beta
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Weaknesses
- ✗Long context pricing doubles above 200K
- ✗Slightly below Opus 4.6 on hardest tasks
Gemini 2.5 Flash Strengths
- ✓One of the cheapest models available
- ✓1M context at budget pricing
- ✓Free tier available
Gemini 2.5 Flash Weaknesses
- ✗Weaker than Flash 3 on most benchmarks
- ✗Output quality inconsistent on edge cases
Quick Verdict
Best value: Gemini 2.5 Flash is the more affordable option at $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens.
Higher benchmarks: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores higher on average across available benchmarks (83.3% avg).
Larger context: Gemini 2.5 Flash supports 1M tokens.
Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash if cost matters most. Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if you need the best possible quality for complex tasks.