Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 4 Argon
Compare Claude Sonnet 5 and Gemini 4 Argon side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Open Prompt, OCR, Classification, and Image Captioning.
Compare Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 4 Argon 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 Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 4 Argon on Vision Evals
Gemini 4 Argon scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 4 Argon leads 82.5% to 36.1%.
Overall, Claude Sonnet 5 averages 55.3% (#47 of 63) against 87.5% (#1 of 63) for Gemini 4 Argon.
Gemini 4 Argon is cheaper ($0.0058 vs $0.0074 per sample), while Claude Sonnet 5 is faster (5.9s vs 13.4s per sample).
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 4 Argon Comparison Table
Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 13, 2026
| Property | Claude Sonnet 5 | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jun 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Undisclosed |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | No published price |
| Output $/1M | $10.00 | No published price |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 55.3% | 87.5% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0074 | $0.0058 |
| Avg speed / sample | 5.86s | 13.40s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 36.1% | 82.5% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.9 to 83.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 85.1% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.3 to 85.5 |
| Counting (low) | 56.8% | 86.0% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.1 to 86.5 |
| Counting (high) | – | 90.5% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 91.9 |
| Identification (low) | 81.3% | 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) | 59.4% | 85.7% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 59.5% | 88.0% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 43.0% | 89.4% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.1 to 90.7 |
| Reasoning (high) | 43.0% | 91.4% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 92.0 |
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 4 Argon: Overview
Claude Sonnet 5 is a mid-tier large language model from Anthropic, released on June 30, 2026, as the latest model in the Sonnet series and a direct successor to Claude Sonnet 4.6. It is a hybrid reasoning model designed primarily for agentic workflows, software coding, and professional tasks. The model features a 1 million token context window, a 128k maximum output token limit, and runs adaptive thinking by default, giving API users fine-grained control over reasoning effort across five levels (low, medium, high, max, and extra-high). It uses an updated tokenizer shared with Opus 4.7 and later models, which produces approximately 30% more tokens for equivalent text compared to earlier Claude models. On benchmarks, Sonnet 5 scores 63.2% on agentic coding and 81.2% on OSWorld, narrowing the gap with Opus 4.8 while remaining at Sonnet-tier pricing.
The model supports text and image input with text output, and accepts tools including browsers and terminals for autonomous multi-step task execution. Anthropic's safety evaluations report that Sonnet 5 shows a lower rate of undesirable behaviors than Sonnet 4.6 and is generally safer in agentic contexts, with improved resistance to prompt injection and reduced sycophancy. Cybersecurity safeguards equivalent to those on Opus 4.7 and 4.8 are active, though Anthropic notes the model was not deliberately trained on cybersecurity tasks. The model is proprietary and API-only, with no open weights.
Gemini 4 Argon is Google DeepMind's frontier Gemini 4 model, built to sustain extended reasoning across long-horizon workflows in software engineering, enterprise knowledge work such as legal and finance, scientific analysis, and defensive cybersecurity. It accepts text, image, video, and document input and returns text, operating over a one million token context window. The model raises the maximum output length to one million tokens, compared with a 64K ceiling on earlier Gemini releases, so a single reasoning trajectory can run for hundreds of thousands of tokens before terminating.
On the visual side, Argon targets multimodal document comprehension, professional chart analysis, and retrieval of specific details from long recordings, reporting 91.7% on LVBench for long-video understanding and 71.6% on Chartography for chart reasoning. Google also reports 77.9% on DeepSWE v1.1, 51.3% on AutomationBench, 68% on CWE-bench v1, and first place on the Vals Index, which aggregates finance, coding, legal, and tax tasks. Following Gemini API conventions, it localizes 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 alongside captioning, document parsing, and visual question answering. Google describes adversarial training and automated red teaming for indirect prompt injection resistance, plus chain-of-thought and action monitors that halt execution when behavior drifts outside user intent.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 4 Argon performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 87.5% (#1 of 63) against 55.3% (#47 of 63) for Claude Sonnet 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 Argon leads with 82.5% against 36.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 4 Argon is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0058 per sample against $0.0074. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Claude Sonnet 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.9s per inference against 13.4s. 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 object detection and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.