Skip to main content
TC
TokenCost

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Complete pricing and performance comparison between Anthropic's Claude Opus 4.6 and Google's Gemini 2.5 Flash.

Quick Verdict

Cheaper
Gemini 2.5 Flash
16.7x cheaper input, 10.0x cheaper output
Larger Context
Gemini 2.5 Flash
1.0M vs 200K
Higher Quality
Claude Opus 4.6
Score: 47 vs 21
Faster
Gemini 2.5 Flash
231 vs 56 tok/s

Pricing Comparison

SpecClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashDifference
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Input / 1M tokens$5$0.3Gemini 2.5 Flash is 94% more expensive
Output / 1M tokens$25$2.5Gemini 2.5 Flash is 90% more expensive
Context Window200K1.0M5x difference
Max Output32K66K

Performance Benchmarks

MetricClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashWinner
Quality Index4721Claude Opus 4.6
Output Speed56 tok/s231 tok/sGemini 2.5 Flash
Time to First Token1.69s0.42sGemini 2.5 Flash
Value (Quality/$)9.368.7Higher = better value

Benchmark data from Artificial Analysis. Quality Index is a composite score across reasoning, coding, and knowledge tasks.

Cost at Scale

Estimated cost at different usage levels (3:1 input-to-output token ratio, typical for chat).

UsageClaude Opus 4.6Gemini 2.5 FlashSavings
Single request
1K in / 300 out
$0.013$0.0010Gemini 2.5 Flash saves $0.011
10 requests
10K in / 3K out
$0.125$0.010Gemini 2.5 Flash saves $0.115
100 requests
100K in / 30K out
$1.25$0.105Gemini 2.5 Flash saves $1.15
1,000 requests
1M in / 300K out
$12.50$1.05Gemini 2.5 Flash saves $11.45
10,000 requests
10M in / 3M out
$125.00$10.50Gemini 2.5 Flash saves $114.50
1M requests/mo
1B in / 300M out
$12500.00$1050.00Gemini 2.5 Flash saves $11450.00

Pros & Cons

Claude Opus 4.6 Strengths

  • +Higher quality score (47 vs 21)

Gemini 2.5 Flash Strengths

  • +Cheaper input tokens
  • +Cheaper output tokens
  • +Larger context window (1.0M vs 200K)
  • +Higher max output tokens
  • +Faster output (231 vs 56 tok/s)
  • +Lower latency (faster first token)

When to Use Each Model

Choose Claude Opus 4.6 for

  • Tasks requiring maximum accuracy and reasoning

Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash for

  • Budget-conscious projects where cost is the primary factor
  • Long documents, large codebases, or multi-turn conversations
  • Generating long-form content or detailed code
  • Real-time applications, chat, or autocomplete

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
For input tokens, Gemini 2.5 Flash is 16.7x cheaper at $0.3/1M tokens. For output tokens, Gemini 2.5 Flash is 10.0x cheaper at $2.5/1M tokens. At typical usage (1M input + 300K output), Claude Opus 4.6 costs $12.50 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash at $1.05.
What's the context window difference?
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 200K context (200,000 tokens), while Gemini 2.5 Flash supports 1.0M (1,048,576 tokens). Gemini 2.5 Flash can handle 5x more context in a single request.
Which model has better benchmarks?
Quality Index: Claude Opus 4.6 scores 47 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash at 21. Speed: Claude Opus 4.6 generates 56 tok/s vs Gemini 2.5 Flash at 231 tok/s. Time to first token: Claude Opus 4.6 at 1.69s vs Gemini 2.5 Flash at 0.42s.
When should I choose Claude Opus 4.6 over Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Choose Claude Opus 4.6 when you need: Higher quality score (47 vs 21). Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash when you need: Cheaper input tokens, Cheaper output tokens, Larger context window (1.0M vs 200K), Higher max output tokens, Faster output (231 vs 56 tok/s), Lower latency (faster first token).
How much would 10,000 API requests cost?
At 1K input + 300 output tokens per request (typical chat): Claude Opus 4.6 = $125.00, Gemini 2.5 Flash = $10.50. At 10K input + 1K output per request (longer conversations): Claude Opus 4.6 = $750.00, Gemini 2.5 Flash = $55.00.

Related Comparisons