Model Comparator

Compare up to four models using the same criteria.

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High)
Google
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch)
Anthropic

Differences only

✓ Best published value among measured models. — Data unavailable. These metrics do not establish an overall ranking.

Model Comparator
Metrics	Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) Google	Claude Opus 4.6 (batch) Anthropic
Intelligence	Best: 32.6	31.9
Coding	70.1	—
Agentic	26	—
Speed	177 t/s	—
TTFT	14.7 s	—
Input · $ / 1M tokens	$1.50	—
Output · $ / 1M tokens	$9	—
Context window	1M	1M
Reasoning	Yes	Yes
Open weights	No	—
Cost / task	$3.69	—

Intelligence

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): Best: 32.6
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): 31.9

Coding

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 70.1
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

Agentic

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 26
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

Speed

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 177 t/s
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

TTFT

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 14.7 s
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

Input · $ / 1M tokens

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): $1.50
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

Output · $ / 1M tokens

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): $9
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

Context window

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 1M
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): 1M

Reasoning

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): Yes
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): Yes

Open weights

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): No
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

Cost / task

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): $3.69
Claude Opus 4.6 (batch): —

Each reasoning level remains a separate configuration.

Score and cost

Each line joins the reasoning levels of a compared model; the large point marks the configuration in the table. The top-right corner holds the best score for the lowest cost. Select another point to compare that level.

Gemini 3.5 Flash (High)32.6 · $3.69

Not plotted for lack of data on these axes: Claude Opus 4.6 (batch).