ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash vs o3-pro

Too close to call on our weighted score (o3-pro 68, Claude Opus 4.1 65, Gemini 2.0 Flash 65). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 4.1

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI144.1
    • Price$15.00 / $75.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Opus 4.1

  2. Google

    Gemini 2.0 Flash

    Released Dec 11, 2024

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

  3. OpenAI

    o3-pro

    Released Jun 10, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI147.4
    • Price$20.00 / $80.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove o3-pro
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (o3-pro 68/100, Claude Opus 4.1 65/100, Gemini 2.0 Flash 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: o3-pro for raw capability, Claude Opus 4.1 on price and Gemini 2.0 Flash for long inputs. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

  • Capabilityo3-proCapabilities Index (ECI): o3-pro 147.4 · Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 · Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7
  • Lowest priceClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.1 $30.00 · o3-pro $35.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Gemini 2.0 Flash unpriced
  • Longest contextGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash 1,048,576 · Claude Opus 4.1 200,000 · o3-pro 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.0 FlashClaude Opus 4.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Gemini 2.0 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · o3-pro: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Opus 4.1Gemini 2.0 Flasho3-pro
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)67%715975
Inputs & features20%709070
Context window13%326132
Overall100%65/10065/10068/100

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.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash vs o3-pro specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicGemini 2.0 FlashGoogleo3-proOpenAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)144.1134.7147.4 (best)
ECI rank#81 of 148#116 of 148#60 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions77.3%——
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics12.6%——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics68.9%——
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues73.4%——
Price per million tokens
Input$15.00 (best)—$20.00
Output$75.00 (best)—$80.00
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$30.00 (best)—$35.00
Long-context rateSame rate—Same rate
Price sourceMedian of 14 providers—Official OpenAI API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)200,000 tokens
Max output32,000 tokens8,192 tokens100,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsYesYesNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYesNoYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryProprietary
API model ID——o3-pro
API providers14 (best)—6
ReleasedAug 5, 2025Dec 11, 2024Jun 10, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMar 31, 2025Jun 2024May 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.

  • Claude Opus 4.1$300.00
  • Gemini 2.0 Flash—
  • o3-pro$360.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Opus 4.1, Gemini 2.0 Flash or o3-pro?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (o3-pro 68/100, Claude Opus 4.1 65/100, Gemini 2.0 Flash 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: o3-pro for raw capability, Claude Opus 4.1 on price and Gemini 2.0 Flash for long inputs. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1, Gemini 2.0 Flash or o3-pro?

Claude Opus 4.1 is cheaper at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). o3-pro costs $20.00 input / $80.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $30.00 per million tokens for Claude Opus 4.1 versus $35.00 for o3-pro (1.2× as much). Gemini 2.0 Flash has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

o3-pro scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): o3-pro 147.4 (#60 of 148), Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 (#81 of 148) and Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 (#116 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (145.8–149.7 vs 141.6–146.0), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.0 Flash and o3-pro yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, o3-pro 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 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Opus 4.1 and 200,000 for o3-pro. Maximum output per response: Claude Opus 4.1 up to 32,000, Gemini 2.0 Flash up to 8,192, o3-pro up to 100,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Opus 4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Gemini 2.0 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; o3-pro accepts text and images. Gemini 2.0 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Claude Opus 4.1, Gemini 2.0 Flash and o3-pro are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the newest, released Aug 5, 2025. o3-pro came out Jun 10, 2025; Gemini 2.0 Flash came out Dec 11, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 4.1 Mar 31, 2025, Gemini 2.0 Flash Jun 2024, o3-pro May 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