Roboflow

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash

Compare Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 3.8 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash 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 5.5
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGemini 3.8 Flash
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash on Vision Evals

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on 4 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 74.5% to 68.1%.

Overall, Claude Opus 5.5 averages 82.0% (#3 of 63) against 79.8% (#7 of 63) for Gemini 3.8 Flash.

Gemini 3.8 Flash is cheaper ($0.0045 vs $0.015 per sample), while Claude Opus 5.5 is faster (7.6s vs 12.8s per sample).

Claude Opus 5.5Gemini 3.8 Flash

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 17, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 5.5Gemini 3.8 Flash
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$4.00$0.825
Output $/1M$20.00$4.13
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
82.0%
79.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.015$0.0045
Avg speed / sample7.63s12.76s
By task
Object Detection (low)
74.5%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.0 to 75.0
$0.021
68.1%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.3 to 69.0
$0.0045
Object Detection (high)
76.0%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.7 to 77.0
$0.030
74.8%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.4 to 75.6
$0.023
Counting (low)
80.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4
$0.0081
78.8%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 81.1
$0.0040
Counting (high)
82.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.7 to 83.8
$0.0098
79.3%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.027
Identification (low)
93.8%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 93.8
$0.0058
97.9%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0016
Identification (high)
95.8%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 96.9
$0.0067
96.9%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9
$0.0037
OCR (low)
78.3%
$0.016
72.8%
$0.0049
by category
Single value
67.8%
Transcription
96.7%
Structured JSON
91.5%
Text localization
61.0%
Single value
73.5%
Transcription
91.3%
Structured JSON
86.1%
Text localization
26.4%
OCR (high)
79.9%
$0.023
78.7%
$0.039
by category
Single value
69.6%
Transcription
96.1%
Structured JSON
94.1%
Text localization
61.1%
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
94.1%
Structured JSON
90.9%
Text localization
58.6%
Reasoning (low)
83.0%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 84.1
$0.0090
81.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.8 to 81.5
$0.0038
Reasoning (high)
85.9%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 88.1
$0.011
84.5%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 83.4 to 85.4
$0.023

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash: Overview

Claude Opus 5.5

Claude Opus 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Anthropic and the first entry in the Claude 5.5 family. It accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, with a one million token context window and up to 128,000 output tokens per response. Adaptive thinking is always enabled on this model and cannot be disabled; thinking depth is instead governed by an effort parameter with five levels, where medium is the default, a change from the high default used by Claude Opus 5 and earlier Opus models. Anthropic reports a knowledge cutoff of June 2026.

On the visual side, Anthropic characterizes Opus 5.5 as its strongest Opus release for vision and computer use, describing improved reading of dense documents, charts, screenshots, and diagrams for document extraction and visual analysis tasks. Published results include 89.0% on Chartography with tools and 81.8% on OSWorld 2.0 under partial credit scoring, alongside 48.7% under strict scoring reported in the system card. The accompanying system card states that Opus 5.5 scored higher than Opus 5 on every evaluation in its capability summary, with the largest gains concentrated in agentic coding, visual reasoning, computer use, and long-horizon knowledge work. The model ships with safety classifiers covering biology and cybersecurity that can route blocked requests to earlier Claude models.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Gemini 3.8 Flash is a natively multimodal reasoning model in Google's Gemini 3 series, positioned as the speed and cost oriented Flash tier while targeting long-horizon software engineering, autonomous agents, and enterprise workflows. It accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents in a single request and returns text, with an input limit of 1,048,576 tokens and an output limit of 65,536 tokens. Thinking is configurable at low, medium, and high levels, and the model supports function calling, code execution, structured outputs, context caching, search and Maps grounding, file search, and computer use in preview. Image generation, audio generation, and the Live API are not supported.

On vision oriented evaluations the model reports 86.2% on CharXiv Reasoning for chart and figure synthesis and 87.8% on LVBench for long video understanding in agentic mode, alongside 90.8% on Terminal-Bench 2.1 and 61.6% on SWE-Bench Pro for coding. Following Gemini API conventions, it can localize objects by emitting bounding boxes as [ymin, xmin, ymax, xmax] integers normalized to a 0 to 1000 range, which supports prompt driven detection and grounding in addition to captioning, document parsing, and visual question answering. The knowledge cutoff is March 2026, though coverage in some domains reflects the January 2025 cutoff shared across the Gemini 3 family.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Opus 5.5 performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the five vision tasks and averages 82.0% (#3 of 63) against 79.8% (#7 of 63) for Gemini 3.8 Flash. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Claude Opus 5.5 leads with 74.5% against 68.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemini 3.8 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0045 per sample against $0.015. Claude Opus 5.5 is priced at $4.00 per 1M input tokens and $20.00 per 1M output; Gemini 3.8 Flash is priced at $0.83 per 1M input tokens and $4.13 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Opus 5.5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.6s per inference against 12.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.