Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash vs o3-pro
Too close to call on our weighted score (o3-pro 68, Gemini 2.0 Flash 65, Claude Opus 4 64). The right pick depends on what you value most.
AnthropicClaude Opus 4
64/100- ECI142.7
- Price$15.00 / $75.00
- Context200K
GoogleGemini 2.0 Flash
65/100- ECI134.7
- Price—
- Context1.05M
OpenAIo3-pro
68/100- ECI147.4
- Price$20.00 / $80.00
- Context200K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (o3-pro 68/100, Gemini 2.0 Flash 65/100, Claude Opus 4 64/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: o3-pro for raw capability, Claude Opus 4 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 4 142.7 · Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7
- Lowest priceClaude Opus 4Claude Opus 4 $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 4 200,000 · o3-pro 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.0 FlashClaude Opus 4: 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
| Measure | Weight | Claude Opus 4 | Gemini 2.0 Flash | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 67% | 69 | 59 | 75 |
| Inputs & features | 20% | 70 | 90 | 70 |
| Context window | 13% | 32 | 61 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 64/100 | 65/100 | 68/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Claude Opus 4Anthropic | Gemini 2.0 FlashGoogle | o3-proOpenAI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 142.7 | 134.7 | 147.4 (best) |
| ECI rank | #87 of 148 | #116 of 148 | #60 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 76.3% | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 64.4% | — | — |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 70.7% | — | — |
| 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 rate | Same rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 5 providers | — | Official OpenAI API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 200,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 200,000 tokens |
| Max output | 32,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 100,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | Yeslow · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — | o3-pro |
| API providers | 5 | — | 6 (best) |
| Released | May 22, 2025 | Dec 11, 2024 | Jun 10, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Mar 31, 2025 | Jun 2024 | May 2024 |
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$300.00
- Gemini 2.0 Flash—
- o3-pro$360.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Claude Opus 4, Gemini 2.0 Flash or o3-pro?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (o3-pro 68/100, Gemini 2.0 Flash 65/100, Claude Opus 4 64/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: o3-pro for raw capability, Claude Opus 4 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, Gemini 2.0 Flash or o3-pro?
Claude Opus 4 is cheaper at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 5 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 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 4 142.7 (#87 of 148) and Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 (#116 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (145.8–149.7 vs 140.2–144.2), 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 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 and 200,000 for o3-pro. Maximum output per response: Claude Opus 4 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 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, Gemini 2.0 Flash and o3-pro are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
o3-pro is the newest, released Jun 10, 2025. Claude Opus 4 came out May 22, 2025; Gemini 2.0 Flash came out Dec 11, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 4 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.
Related comparisons
- Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeek · ECI 137.4
- Claude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle · ECI 145.3
- Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 142.4
- Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2Anthropic · ECI 133.5
- Gemini 2.0 Flash vs GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI · ECI 135.0
- Gemini 2.0 Flash vs DeepSeek-V3DeepSeek · ECI 132.3
