ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Too close to call on our weighted score (Gemini 2.5 Pro 63, Claude Sonnet 4.6 62). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Sonnet 4.6

    Released Feb 17, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI152.3
    • Price$3.00 / $15.00
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Claude Sonnet 4.6

  2. Google

    Gemini 2.5 Pro

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    63/100
    • ECI145.3
    • Price$1.25 / $10.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Pro

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Gemini 2.5 Pro 63/100, Claude Sonnet 4.6 62/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Sonnet 4.6 for raw capability, Gemini 2.5 Pro on price and Gemini 2.5 Pro for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Sonnet 4.6Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Sonnet 4.6 152.3 · Gemini 2.5 Pro 145.3
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.5 ProGemini 2.5 Pro $3.44 · Claude Sonnet 4.6 $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 ProGemini 2.5 Pro 1,048,576 · Claude Sonnet 4.6 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 ProClaude Sonnet 4.6: Text, Images, PDFs · Gemini 2.5 Pro: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemini 2.5 Pro
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8172
Price25%1324
Inputs & features15%80100
Context window10%6061
Overall100%62/10063/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Sonnet 4.6AnthropicGemini 2.5 ProGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)152.3 (best)145.3
ECI rank#40 of 148 (best)#78 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions87.4% (best)85.3%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—24.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics85.8% (best)84.7%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues75.2% (best)57.6%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions35.5%—
Price per million tokens
Input$3.00$1.25 (best)
Output$15.00$10.00 (best)
Cached input$0.30$0.125 (best)
Blended (3:1)$6.00$3.44 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateOver 200K: $2.50 / $15.00
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output64,000 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesYes
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYeslow · medium · high · maxYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDclaude-sonnet-4-6gemini-2.5-pro
API providers41 (best)22
ReleasedFeb 17, 2026Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoffAug 31, 2025Jan 2025
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 4.6$60.00
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro$32.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Gemini 2.5 Pro 63/100, Claude Sonnet 4.6 62/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Sonnet 4.6 for raw capability, Gemini 2.5 Pro on price and Gemini 2.5 Pro for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.44 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Pro versus $6.00 for Claude Sonnet 4.6 (1.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Sonnet 4.6 152.3 (#40 of 148) and Gemini 2.5 Pro 145.3 (#78 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (149.6–154.7 vs 143.6–146.9), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Claude Sonnet 4.6 87.4%, Gemini 2.5 Pro 85.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Sonnet 4.6 85.8%, Gemini 2.5 Pro 84.7%; SWE-bench Verified — Claude Sonnet 4.6 75.2%, Gemini 2.5 Pro 57.6%.

Which is better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Claude Sonnet 4.6 75.2% and Gemini 2.5 Pro 57.6%. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Claude Sonnet 4.6. Maximum output per response: Claude Sonnet 4.6 up to 64,000, Gemini 2.5 Pro up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 accepts text, images and PDFs; Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Pro handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Pro are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the newest, released Feb 17, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Pro came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Sonnet 4.6 Aug 31, 2025, Gemini 2.5 Pro Jan 2025.

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