ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 vs GPT-4.1 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash

Too close to call on our weighted score (Gemini 2.0 Flash 65, GPT-4.1 63, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 54). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. 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

  2. OpenAI

    GPT-4.1

    Released Apr 14, 2025

    63/100
    • ECI136.8
    • Price$2.00 / $8.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove GPT-4.1

  3. Google

    Gemini 2.0 Flash

    Released Dec 11, 2024

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

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Gemini 2.0 Flash 65/100, GPT-4.1 63/100, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 54/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GPT-4.1 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

  • CapabilityGPT-4.1Capabilities Index (ECI): GPT-4.1 136.8 · Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5
  • Lowest priceGPT-4.1GPT-4.1 $3.50 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Gemini 2.0 Flash unpriced
  • Longest contextGemini 2.0 Flash and GPT-4.1Gemini 2.0 Flash 1,048,576 · GPT-4.1 1,047,576 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.0 FlashClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2: Text, Images, PDFs · GPT-4.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Gemini 2.0 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2GPT-4.1Gemini 2.0 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)67%576159
Inputs & features20%607090
Context window13%326161
Overall100%54/10063/10065/100

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 Sonnet 3.5 v2 vs GPT-4.1 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2AnthropicGPT-4.1OpenAIGemini 2.0 FlashGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)133.5136.8 (best)134.7
ECI rank#119 of 148#111 of 148 (best)#116 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions55.3%66.9% (best)—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—6.0%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics8.5%38.3% (best)—
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues—48.5%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—31.1%—
Price per million tokens
Input$3.00$2.00 (best)—
Output$15.00$8.00 (best)—
Cached input—$0.50—
Blended (3:1)$6.00$3.50 (best)—
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate—
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial OpenAI API—
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens1,047,576 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens32,768 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsYesYesYes
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryProprietary
API model ID—gpt-4.1—
API providers125 (best)—
ReleasedOct 22, 2024Apr 14, 2025Dec 11, 2024
Knowledge cutoffApr 30, 2024Apr 2024Jun 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 Sonnet 3.5 v2$60.00
  • GPT-4.1$36.00
  • Gemini 2.0 Flash—
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2, GPT-4.1 or Gemini 2.0 Flash?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Gemini 2.0 Flash 65/100, GPT-4.1 63/100, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 54/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GPT-4.1 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2, GPT-4.1 or Gemini 2.0 Flash?

GPT-4.1 is cheaper at $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI 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 $3.50 per million tokens for GPT-4.1 versus $6.00 for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (1.7× as much). Gemini 2.0 Flash has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

GPT-4.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GPT-4.1 136.8 (#111 of 148), Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 (#116 of 148) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5 (#119 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (133.6–138.4 vs 124.3–136.7), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 and Gemini 2.0 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GPT-4.1 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 GPT-4.1 have the largest context windows (1,048,576 and 1,047,576 tokens), against 200,000 for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2. Maximum output per response: Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 up to 8,192, GPT-4.1 up to 32,768, Gemini 2.0 Flash up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 accepts text, images and PDFs; GPT-4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Gemini 2.0 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.0 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2, GPT-4.1 and Gemini 2.0 Flash are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

GPT-4.1 is the newest, released Apr 14, 2025. Gemini 2.0 Flash came out Dec 11, 2024; Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 came out Oct 22, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 Apr 30, 2024, GPT-4.1 Apr 2024, Gemini 2.0 Flash Jun 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