Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast) vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.

Winner summary

Claude Opus 4.6 wins 21 of 40 shared benchmarks. Leads in agentic · general · math.

Category leads
arena·Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)knowledge·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewspeed·Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)agentic·Claude Opus 4.6reasoning·Gemini 3.1 Pro Previewgeneral·Claude Opus 4.6math·Claude Opus 4.6coding·Claude Opus 4.6safety·Claude Opus 4.6
Hype vs Reality
Claude Opus 4.6
#136 by perf·#9 by attention
DESERVED
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
#170 by perf·#9 by attention
OVERHYPED
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
#137 by perf·#5 by attention
DESERVED
Best value
2.1x better value than Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6
3.2 pts/$
$15.00/M
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
0.5 pts/$
$90.00/M
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
6.9 pts/$
$7.00/M
Vendor risk
Anthropic logo
Anthropic
$965.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
Anthropic logo
Anthropic
$965.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
Google DeepMind logo
Google DeepMind
$4.20T·Tier 1
Low risk
Head to head
Claude Opus 4.6Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast) leads by +5.2
Claude Opus 4.6
1537.0
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
1542.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1446.2
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast) leads by +6.4
Claude Opus 4.6
1497.3
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
1503.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
1487.0
VisualToolBench (VTB)
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.4
Claude Opus 4.6
27.5
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
27.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
29.0
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast) leads by +46.2
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
67.6
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
21.4
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +20.7
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
48.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
68.8
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast) leads by +23.2
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
53.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
29.7
APEX-Agents
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +11.0
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Claude Opus 4.6
46.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
35.3
ARC-AGI
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +4.0
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Claude Opus 4.6
94.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
98.0
ARC-AGI-2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +7.9
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Claude Opus 4.6
69.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
77.1
Chess Puzzles
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +40.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Claude Opus 4.6
12.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
52.6
Cl Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +0.1
Claude Opus 4.6
20.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
20.8
Cl Bench Life
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +0.1
Claude Opus 4.6
17.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
16.9
DeepResearch Bench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +7.5
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
Claude Opus 4.6
55.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
47.8
Dtbench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +9.8
Claude Opus 4.6
85.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.1
Ebr Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.6
Claude Opus 4.6
12.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
14.3
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +3.8
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.6
40.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
36.9
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +6.2
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.6
22.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
16.7
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
Claude Opus 4.6
26.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.8
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +6.3
Claude Opus 4.6
66.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
59.6
Furniture Assembly
Claude Opus 4.6
0.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
0.0
GPQA diamond
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +5.2
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Claude Opus 4.6
87.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
92.6
GSO-Bench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +18.7
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
Claude Opus 4.6
41.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
22.6
HLE
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +12.6
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
Claude Opus 4.6
31.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
43.7
Lmca
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +2.3
Claude Opus 4.6
65.6
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
63.3
Metr Time Horizons
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +1.8
Claude Opus 4.6
78.9
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
77.0
Mystery Game Puzzles
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +9.9
Claude Opus 4.6
17.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
27.3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +1.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Claude Opus 4.6
94.4
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
95.6
PostTrainBench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +2.8
Claude Opus 4.6
24.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
22.0
Proofbench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +24.0
Claude Opus 4.6
50.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
26.0
MASK
Claude Opus 4.6
96.3
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
96.3
Professional Reasoning · Finance
Claude Opus 4.6
53.3
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
53.3
Professional Reasoning · Legal
Claude Opus 4.6
52.3
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
52.3
Remote Labor Index (RLI)
Claude Opus 4.6
4.2
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
4.2
SWE Atlas · Codebase QnA
Claude Opus 4.6
33.3
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
33.3
SWE Atlas · Test Writing
Claude Opus 4.6
36.7
Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)
36.7
SimpleBench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +14.4
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Claude Opus 4.6
61.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
75.5
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +26.5
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Claude Opus 4.6
47.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
73.5
SWE-Bench verified
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +3.1
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Claude Opus 4.6
78.7
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
75.6
Terminal Bench
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads by +0.4
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
Claude Opus 4.6
79.8
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
80.2
WeirdML
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +5.9
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Claude Opus 4.6
78.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
72.1
Full benchmark table
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Claude Opus 4.6 (Fast)Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
1537.01542.21446.2
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
1497.31503.71487.0
VisualToolBench (VTB)
27.527.529.0
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
—67.621.4
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
—48.168.8
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
—53.029.7
APEX-Agents
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
46.3—35.3
ARC-AGI
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
94.0—98.0
ARC-AGI-2
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
69.2—77.1
Chess Puzzles
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
12.7—52.6
Cl Bench
20.7—20.8
Cl Bench Life
17.0—16.9
DeepResearch Bench
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
55.3—47.8
Dtbench
85.3—95.1
Ebr Bench
12.7—14.3
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
40.7—36.9
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
22.9—16.7
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
26.8—26.8
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
66.0—59.6
Furniture Assembly
0.0—0.0
GPQA diamond
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
87.4—92.6
GSO-Bench
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
41.2—22.6
HLE
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
31.1—43.7
Lmca
65.6—63.3
Metr Time Horizons
78.9—77.0
Mystery Game Puzzles
17.4—27.3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
94.4—95.6
PostTrainBench
24.8—22.0
Proofbench
50.0—26.0
MASK
96.396.3—
Professional Reasoning · Finance
53.353.3—
Professional Reasoning · Legal
52.352.3—
Remote Labor Index (RLI)
4.24.2—
SWE Atlas · Codebase QnA
33.333.3—
SWE Atlas · Test Writing
36.736.7—
SimpleBench
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
61.1—75.5
SimpleQA Verified
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
47.0—73.5
SWE-Bench verified
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
78.7—75.6
Terminal Bench
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
79.8—80.2
WeirdML
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
78.0—72.1
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
ModelInputOutputContextProjected $/mo
Anthropic logoClaude Opus 4.6$5.00$25.001.0M tokens (~500 books)$100.00
Anthropic logoClaude Opus 4.6 (Fast)$30.00$150.001.0M tokens (~500 books)$600.00
Google DeepMind logoGemini 3.1 Pro Preview$2.00$12.001.0M tokens (~524 books)$45.00