Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Compare Claude Opus 4 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Object Detection, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.5 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 Opus 4

Claude Opus 4 is deprecated and can no longer be run. Details and evals are still available on its model page.

GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Overview

Claude Opus 4

Claude 4 Opus, released by Anthropic in May 2025, is the flagship model of the Claude 4 family, built for complex, long-horizon reasoning and advanced coding workflows. It is multimodal, supporting text (including voice), images, and tool use, and operates as a hybrid reasoning model—able to deliver quick answers in fast mode or switch to extended thinking for deeper, multi-step problem solving. With a ~200,000-token context window and a training cutoff around March 2025, it is optimized for handling large documents, long conversations, and sophisticated agentic tasks.

Positioned at the high end of Anthropic’s offerings, Opus 4 achieves state-of-the-art results on coding benchmarks like SWE-Bench (72.5%) and Terminal-Bench (43.2%). It is best suited for research, enterprise automation, and software development at scale. The model is classified at Anthropic’s ASL-3 safety level, denoting advanced oversight and safety features.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite, released for general availability on July 22, 2025, is the most cost-efficient model in the Gemini 2.5 family, designed for high-volume and latency-sensitive tasks. It is multimodal, supporting text, images, video, audio, and PDFs as inputs, with text as its primary output. The model handles up to 1 million input tokens and generates outputs up to 64K tokens, making it suitable for large-scale document or media processing at low cost. It is built on a Sparse Mixture-of-Experts architecture with native multimodal support, though exact parameter counts are undisclosed.

Flash-Lite offers the lowest usage cost among Gemini 2.5 models. It introduces developer controls for “thinking mode,” allowing fine-tuning of reasoning depth vs. efficiency. It also integrates native tools such as code execution, search grounding, and URL context. While strong on translation, classification, coding, and general multimodal reasoning, it lacks support for image or audio generation in its stable release and is less capable than Gemini 2.5 Flash or Pro on complex reasoning-heavy workflows.

Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Opus 4Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2025Jul 2025
Context Window200K1.0M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$15.00$0.100
Output $/1M$75.00$0.400
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
ClassificationDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
56.72%
53.73%
Avg Response Time19.74s7.19s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens294
Median output tokens6
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0000
Defect Detection
66.7%(10/15)
66.7%(10/15)
Document Understanding
88.9%(8/9)
66.7%(6/9)
Object Counting
0%(0/10)
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
71.4%(10/14)
Spatial Understanding
57.9%(11/19)
47.4%(9/19)
OCR
Overall Score
77.73%
Avg Response Time7.45s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens290
Median output tokens12
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0000
Focused Scene OCR
75.8%(75/99)
Handwritten Math
70%(7/10)
License Plate Recognition
90%(27/30)
Text Recognition
80%(24/30)
VQA & Extraction
75%(45/60)

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