Roboflow

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Classification, Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4.5
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: Overview

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5, released by Anthropic in September 2025, is the company’s most advanced Sonnet-series model, built for high-performance reasoning, coding, and long-horizon agentic workflows. It is a multimodal system that accepts both text and images, with a 200,000-token context window designed for handling large documents and extended interactions. Anthropic highlights its improvements in reliability, reduced sycophancy, and alignment, making it suitable for sustained enterprise use.

The model delivers strong results in coding and autonomous workflows, achieving 61.4% on the OSWorld benchmark and leading performance on SWE-bench Verified. It introduces infrastructure features such as a memory tool (beta), checkpointing for Claude Code, parallel tool use, and tighter integration with VS Code. Compared to Opus, which targets broader reasoning, Sonnet 4.5 is optimized for structured, long-duration tasks. Positioned against leading offerings from OpenAI and Google, it is aimed at enterprise automation, software engineering, and research-intensive applications.

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is a natively multimodal reasoning model from Google DeepMind in the Gemini 3 series, based on the Gemini 3 Pro architecture. It processes text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs within a 1 million token context window and produces text output up to 64K tokens. The model targets high-volume, latency-sensitive workloads and supports visual question answering, image and document data extraction, content moderation, classification, translation, automated speech recognition, and agentic data pipelines. It exposes configurable thinking levels of minimal, low, medium, and high, which set the depth of internal reasoning applied per request and let developers balance response quality against cost and latency.

On benchmarks reported at launch, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite scores 86.9% on GPQA Diamond and 76.8% on the MMMU Pro multimodal benchmark, and reaches an Elo score of 1432 on the Arena.ai leaderboard. According to Artificial Analysis benchmarks, it produces a 2.5 times faster time to first answer token and a 45% increase in output speed relative to Gemini 2.5 Flash. It also shows improved instruction following, higher audio input quality for automated speech recognition tasks, and support for structured JSON output used in data extraction pipelines.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2025Mar 2026
Context Window200K1.0M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$0.250
Output $/1M$15.00$1.50
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
ClassificationDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Foundation Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
59.7%
68.66%
Avg Response Time5.67s1.86s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens2.2K1.1K
Median output tokens1826
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0092$0.0003
Defect Detection
73.3%(11/15)
73.3%(11/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
77.8%(7/9)
Object Counting
10%(1/10)
30%(3/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
64.3%(9/14)
Spatial Understanding
63.2%(12/19)
84.2%(16/19)
OCR
Overall Score
67.25%
89.96%
Avg Response Time3.93s1.32s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens7351.1K
Median output tokens11510
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0039$0.0003
Focused Scene OCR
71.7%(71/99)
91.9%(91/99)
Handwritten Math
20%(2/10)
80%(8/10)
License Plate Recognition
53.3%(16/30)
100%(30/30)
Text Recognition
66.7%(20/30)
90%(27/30)
VQA & Extraction
75%(45/60)
83.3%(50/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology