Roboflow

Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash

Compare Claude Opus 5 and Gemini 3.7 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash live

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

Compare image classification labels and confidence scores side-by-side.

Open Classification in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Opus 5
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGemini 3.7 Flash
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Anthropic

Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.7 Flash scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 3.7 Flash leads 69.4% to 54.4%.

Overall, Claude Opus 5 averages 77.1% (#9 of 30) against 84.6% (#2 of 30) for Gemini 3.7 Flash.

Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper ($0.0016 vs $0.017 per sample), while Claude Opus 5 is faster (7.4s vs 10.0s per sample).

Claude Opus 5Gemini 3.7 Flash

Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash Comparison Table

Evals updated August 14, 2026Pricing updated August 15, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 5Gemini 3.7 Flash
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUndisclosed
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00$0.375
Output $/1M$25.00$1.88
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Image Tagging
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
77.1%
84.6%
Avg cost / sample$0.017$0.0016
Avg speed / sample7.38s9.97s
By task
Object Detection
54.4%
$0.027
69.4%
$0.0024
Counting
70.3%
$0.0096
77.0%
$0.0013
Identification
84.4%
$0.0072
96.9%
$0.0007
OCR
93.2%
$0.020
86.9%
$0.0014
Data Extraction
88.7%
$0.0080
94.8%
$0.0007
Reasoning (low)
71.5%
$0.010
82.8%
$0.0011
Reasoning (high)
74.2%
$0.018
82.1%
$0.0026

Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash: Overview

Claude Opus 5

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 3.7 Flash

Gemini 3.7 Flash is a proprietary multimodal model from Google, positioned in the Flash branch of the Gemini 3 series that trades some of the capacity of the larger Pro models for lower latency and lower cost per token. It accepts interleaved text and image input alongside other modalities handled by the Gemini family and returns text, and it continues the series pattern of exposing a configurable thinking budget so that reasoning effort can be scaled up for harder problems or reduced for high throughput extraction, routing and classification work. The model is announced roughly three weeks after Gemini 3.6 Flash, part of an unusually fast iteration cadence within the Flash line.

Google reports gains concentrated in agentic coding and front end generation, citing a WebDev Arena Elo of 1588 for this release compared with 1538 for the preceding Flash model, and describes it as producing more functional layouts and more feature complete applications in fewer prompts. Weights are not published and the architecture, parameter count and training corpus are undisclosed, consistent with prior Gemini releases. Visual capability follows the Flash lineage, covering image and document understanding, chart and diagram interpretation, text recognition in images, and general visual question answering.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.7 Flash performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 84.6% (#2 of 30) against 77.1% (#9 of 30) 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 Object Detection benchmark, Gemini 3.7 Flash leads with 69.4% against 54.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0016 per sample against $0.017. Claude Opus 5 is priced at $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output; Gemini 3.7 Flash is priced at $0.38 per 1M input tokens and $1.88 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 10.0s. 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.