Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash
Compare Claude Opus 5 and Gemini 3.6 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Open Prompt, Object Detection, and Classification.
Compare Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.6 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash on Vision Evals
Gemini 3.6 Flash scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Counting, where Gemini 3.6 Flash leads 80.2% to 70.3%.
Overall, Claude Opus 5 averages 78.3% (#14 of 53) against 83.0% (#7 of 53) for Gemini 3.6 Flash.
Gemini 3.6 Flash is cheaper ($0.0032 vs $0.017 per sample), while Claude Opus 5 is faster (7.4s vs 14.7s per sample).
Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash Comparison Table
Evals updated September 5, 2026Pricing updated September 8, 2026
| Property | Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jul 2026 | Jul 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $5.00 | $0.750 |
| Output $/1M | $25.00 | $3.75 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Image Tagging | ||
| Video Classification | ||
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 78.3% | 83.0% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.017 | $0.0032 |
| Avg speed / sample | 7.38s | 14.66s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 54.4% | 57.1% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.9 to 59.4 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 70.7% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.3 to 71.2 |
| Counting (low) | 70.3% | 80.2% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4 |
| Counting (high) | – | 79.3% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.0 to 82.4 |
| Identification (low) | 90.6% | 99.0% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0 |
| Identification (high) | – | 100.0% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 100.0 to 100.0 |
| OCR (low) | 93.2% | 88.2% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.9 to 88.4 |
| OCR (high) | – | 89.5% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.5 to 89.6 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 89.7% | 95.9% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 94.8 to 96.9 |
| Data Extraction (high) | – | 94.8% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 95.9 |
| Reasoning (low) | 71.5% | 77.7% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.2 to 80.1 |
| Reasoning (high) | 74.2% | 81.0% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.5 to 83.4 |
Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash: Overview
Claude Opus 5 is a large language model with multimodal vision capabilities developed by Anthropic, released on July 24, 2026 as the fourth model in the Claude 5 family. It sits in the Opus tier of Anthropic's lineup, positioned below the Mythos-class Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models, and is framed by Anthropic as the go-to model for most knowledge work and automation tasks. The model approaches Fable 5's capabilities at roughly half the cost, priced at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens. It becomes the default model on Claude Max and the strongest model available on Claude Pro. The model ships with a 1 million token context window and an adjustable "effort" parameter that allows users to trade reasoning depth for speed and token savings. Early enterprise customers reported that Opus 5 achieved comparable performance to Opus 4.8's maximum-reasoning mode while generating significantly fewer tokens on average, and demonstrated higher accuracy on financial modeling tasks with fewer tool calls and less time.
Claude Opus 5 supports multimodal inputs including images and text, and is designed for agentic workflows, coding, scientific research, and complex enterprise tasks. Anthropic reports the model scores 10.2 percentage points higher than Opus 4.8 on an internal chemistry benchmark, making it the most capable generally available model for scientific research in the Claude lineup. Cyber classifiers on Opus 5 are designed to intervene approximately 85 percent less often than those on Fable 5, with fallback to Opus 4.8 when a classifier triggers. The model does not retain user data for 30 days, unlike Fable 5. It is available across Anthropic's platforms including Claude Code and Claude Cowork, as well as cloud partners.
Gemini 3.6 Flash is a multimodal language model from Google DeepMind, positioned as the workhorse tier in the Gemini 3.x family. It accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs with a 1 million token context window and produces up to 64,000 output tokens. The model builds directly on Gemini 3.5 Flash, incorporating developer and customer feedback to improve token efficiency, coding quality, and knowledge work performance. According to the Artificial Analysis Index, it consumes 17% fewer output tokens than its predecessor, and on some benchmarks such as DeepSWE, token reduction reaches up to 65%. It supports function calling, structured output, search as a tool, and code execution, and includes computer use as a built-in capability in the Gemini API and Gemini Enterprise.
On coding benchmarks, Gemini 3.6 Flash scores 49% on DeepSWE versus 37% for 3.5 Flash, and 63.9% on MLE Bench versus 49.7%. Computer use performance on OSWorld-Verified improves from 78.4% to 83%, and knowledge work scores on GDPval-AA v2 rise from 1349 to 1421. The model carries a knowledge cutoff of March 2026 and ships with enhanced Frontier Safety safeguards covering chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and cyber offense domains, with training to minimize refusals for beneficial uses. It is a proprietary, closed-weights model available in preview through the Gemini API via Google AI Studio, Android Studio, Google Antigravity, Gemini Enterprise, and the Gemini app.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.6 Flash performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 83.0% (#7 of 53) against 78.3% (#14 of 53) for Claude Opus 5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Counting benchmark at low effort, Gemini 3.6 Flash leads with 80.2% against 70.3%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 3.6 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0032 per sample against $0.017. Claude Opus 5 is priced at $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output; Gemini 3.6 Flash is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $3.75 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Claude Opus 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.4s per inference against 14.7s. 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.