ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 72 to 65 and 54 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Google

    Gemini 2.0 Flash

    Released Dec 11, 2024

    65/100
    • ECI134.7
    • Price—
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.0 Flash
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    72/100
    • ECI140.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash

  3. Anthropic

    Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2

    Released Oct 22, 2024

    54/100
    • ECI133.5
    • Price$3.00 / $15.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Gemini 2.0 Flash (65) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (54). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 · Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Gemini 2.0 Flash unpriced
  • Longest contextGemini 2.0 Flash and Gemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash 1,048,576 · Gemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.0 Flash and Gemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.5 FlashClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)67%596757
Inputs & features20%9010060
Context window13%616132
Overall100%65/10072/10054/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 2.0 FlashGoogleGemini 2.5 FlashGoogleClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)134.7140.8 (best)133.5
ECI rank#116 of 148#97 of 148 (best)#119 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions——55.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics——8.5%
Price per million tokens
Input—$0.30 (best)$3.00
Output—$2.50 (best)$15.00
Cached input—$0.03—
Blended (3:1)—$0.85 (best)$6.00
Long-context rate—Same rateSame rate
Price source—Official Google APIMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)1,048,576 tokens (best)200,000 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens65,536 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsYesYesYes
AudioYesYesNo
VideoYesYesNo
ReasoningNoYesNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryProprietary
API model ID—gemini-2.5-flash—
API providers—22 (best)1
ReleasedDec 11, 2024Jun 17, 2025Oct 22, 2024
Knowledge cutoffJun 2024Jan 2025Apr 30, 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemini 2.0 Flash—
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
  • Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2$60.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Gemini 2.0 Flash (65) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (54). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 costs $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.85 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash versus $6.00 for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (7.1× as much). Gemini 2.0 Flash has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 (#97 of 148), Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 (#116 of 148) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5 (#119 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (138.5–142.3 vs 124.3–136.7), so the gap is a real one.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.0 Flash and Gemini 2.5 Flash have the largest context windows (1,048,576 and 1,048,576 tokens), against 200,000 for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.0 Flash up to 8,192, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 2.0 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 accepts text, images and PDFs. Gemini 2.0 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Gemini 2.0 Flash came out Dec 11, 2024; Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 came out Oct 22, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.0 Flash Jun 2024, Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 2025, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 Apr 30, 2024.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons