Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
Gemini 4 Carbon and Claude Opus 5 score 89.4% vs 70.9% averaged across five Vision Evals tasks (#1 and #24 of 68 models), so Gemini 4 Carbon leads overall.
- Gemini 4 Carbon wins all 5 tasks, with its widest lead on object detection (84.5% vs 54.4%).
- Gemini 4 Carbon is about a third of the cost: $0.0061 vs $0.020 overall average cost per sample.
- Claude Opus 5 is faster: 8.2s vs 8.7s per sample.
Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.
Compare Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon 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
Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon on Vision Evals
Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.
Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon Comparison Table
Evals updated November 10, 2026Pricing updated November 10, 2026
| Property | Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jul 2026 | Nov 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $5.00 | No published price |
| Output $/1M | $25.00 | No published price |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Image Tagging | Not listed | Supported |
| Promptable Concept Segmentation | Not listed | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
Both support 3 more features | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 70.9% | 89.4% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.020 | $0.0061 |
| Avg speed / sample | 8.21s | 8.71s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 54.4% | 84.5% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.2 to 84.8 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 85.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.6 to 86.2 |
| Counting (low) | 70.3% | 90.1% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 91.9 |
| Counting (high) | – | 86.9% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 83.8 to 89.2 |
| Identification (low) | 90.6% | 93.8% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 93.8 |
| Identification (high) | – | 96.9% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9 |
| OCR (low) | 68.0% | 87.2% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 65.8% | 89.7% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 71.5% | 91.4% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.1 to 93.4 |
| Reasoning (high) | 74.2% | 92.3% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.0 to 92.7 |
Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon: 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 a lower cost. 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 4 Carbon is a multimodal model from Google. It builds on Gemini 4 Argon and supports reasoning over text and images. Google describes improvements in coding and long-running tasks. Model weights are not publicly released.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 4 Carbon performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 89.4% (#1 of 68) against 70.9% (#24 of 68) 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 at low effort, Gemini 4 Carbon leads with 84.5% against 54.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 4 Carbon is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0061 per sample against $0.020. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Claude Opus 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.2s per inference against 8.7s. 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.