Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash vs GPT-5.5

Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.

Winner summary

GPT-5.5 wins 24 of 34 shared benchmarks. Leads in agentic · reasoning · knowledge.

Category leads
agentic·GPT-5.5reasoning·GPT-5.5arena·Claude Opus 4.7knowledge·GPT-5.5general·GPT-5.5math·GPT-5.5coding·GPT-5.5speed·GPT-5.5
Hype vs Reality
Claude Opus 4.7
#124 by perf·#6 by attention
DESERVED
Gemini 3.5 Flash
#76 by perf·#10 by attention
DESERVED
GPT-5.5
#64 by perf·#9 by attention
DESERVED
Best value
3.1x better value than Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7
3.4 pts/$
$15.00/M
Gemini 3.5 Flash
10.7 pts/$
$5.25/M
GPT-5.5
3.3 pts/$
$17.50/M
Vendor risk
Anthropic logo
Anthropic
$965.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
Google DeepMind logo
Google DeepMind
$3.61T·Tier 1
Low risk
OpenAI logo
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
Head to head
Claude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.5 FlashGPT-5.5
APEX-Agents
GPT-5.5 leads by +5.9
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Claude Opus 4.7
49.2
Gemini 3.5 Flash
27.5
GPT-5.5
55.1
ARC-AGI
GPT-5.5 leads by +1.5
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Claude Opus 4.7
93.5
Gemini 3.5 Flash
92.5
GPT-5.5
95.0
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-5.5 leads by +9.2
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Claude Opus 4.7
75.8
Gemini 3.5 Flash
72.1
GPT-5.5
85.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +17.3
Claude Opus 4.7
1494.1
Gemini 3.5 Flash
1476.3
GPT-5.5
1476.8
Chess Puzzles
GPT-5.5 leads by +18.9
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Claude Opus 4.7
37.9
Gemini 3.5 Flash
42.1
GPT-5.5
61.1
Dtbench
GPT-5.5 leads by +2.2
Claude Opus 4.7
91.1
Gemini 3.5 Flash
91.1
GPT-5.5
93.3
Ebr Bench
GPT-5.5 leads by +15.2
Claude Opus 4.7
19.1
Gemini 3.5 Flash
4.8
GPT-5.5
34.3
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5.5 leads by +7.9
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.7
43.8
Gemini 3.5 Flash
39.0
GPT-5.5
51.7
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
GPT-5.5 leads by +12.5
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.7
22.9
Gemini 3.5 Flash
14.6
GPT-5.5
35.4
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
GPT-5.5 leads by +40.8
Claude Opus 4.7
31.7
Gemini 3.5 Flash
26.8
GPT-5.5
72.5
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
GPT-5.5 leads by +15.9
Claude Opus 4.7
73.9
Gemini 3.5 Flash
66.1
GPT-5.5
89.8
GPQA diamond
GPT-5.5 leads by +1.7
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Claude Opus 4.7
90.5
Gemini 3.5 Flash
94.2
GPT-5.5
95.8
Lmca
GPT-5.5 leads by +2.4
Claude Opus 4.7
61.4
Gemini 3.5 Flash
55.5
GPT-5.5
63.9
Mystery Game Puzzles
GPT-5.5 leads by +26.4
Claude Opus 4.7
20.7
Gemini 3.5 Flash
25.1
GPT-5.5
51.5
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5.5 leads by +2.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Claude Opus 4.7
97.8
Gemini 3.5 Flash
95.5
GPT-5.5
100.0
Proofbench
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +4.0
Claude Opus 4.7
54.0
Gemini 3.5 Flash
31.0
GPT-5.5
50.0
SimpleBench
Gemini 3.5 Flash leads by +9.2
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Claude Opus 4.7
54.0
Gemini 3.5 Flash
72.0
GPT-5.5
62.8
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 3.5 Flash leads by +3.2
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Claude Opus 4.7
51.7
Gemini 3.5 Flash
66.2
GPT-5.5
63.0
SWE-Bench verified
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +2.9
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Claude Opus 4.7
83.5
Gemini 3.5 Flash
79.3
GPT-5.5
80.6
WeirdML
GPT-5.5 leads by +8.5
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Claude Opus 4.7
76.4
Gemini 3.5 Flash
62.6
GPT-5.5
84.9
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
GPT-5.5 leads by +7.4
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
Gemini 3.5 Flash
37.5
GPT-5.5
44.9
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
GPT-5.5 leads by +4.8
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
Gemini 3.5 Flash
70.1
GPT-5.5
74.9
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
GPT-5.5 leads by +4.6
Gemini 3.5 Flash
50.2
GPT-5.5
54.8
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +49.7
Claude Opus 4.7
1555.3
Gemini 3.5 Flash
1505.5
Deepswe
GPT-5.5 leads by +29.7
Gemini 3.5 Flash
37.4
GPT-5.5
67.0
Exploitbench
GPT-5.5 leads by +20.9
Claude Opus 4.7
26.5
GPT-5.5
47.4
Frontiercode
GPT-5.5 leads by +4.4
Claude Opus 4.7
38.5
GPT-5.5
43.0
Furniture Assembly
GPT-5.5 leads by +15.5
Claude Opus 4.7
4.8
GPT-5.5
20.2
GSO-Bench
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +3.9
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
Claude Opus 4.7
44.1
GPT-5.5
40.2
Mirrorcode
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +7.8
Claude Opus 4.7
31.1
GPT-5.5
23.3
Osworld 2 0
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +5.2
Claude Opus 4.7
18.2
GPT-5.5
13.0
PostTrainBench
Claude Opus 4.7 leads by +0.5
Claude Opus 4.7
24.3
GPT-5.5
23.9
Surface Evolver Bench
GPT-5.5 leads by +30.0
Gemini 3.5 Flash
58.1
GPT-5.5
88.1
Terminal Bench
GPT-5.5 leads by +4.5
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency.
Claude Opus 4.7
80.2
GPT-5.5
84.7
Full benchmark table
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.5 FlashGPT-5.5
APEX-Agents
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
49.227.555.1
ARC-AGI
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
93.592.595.0
ARC-AGI-2
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
75.872.185.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
1494.11476.31476.8
Chess Puzzles
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
37.942.161.1
Dtbench
91.191.193.3
Ebr Bench
19.14.834.3
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
43.839.051.7
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
22.914.635.4
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
31.726.872.5
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
73.966.189.8
GPQA diamond
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
90.594.295.8
Lmca
61.455.563.9
Mystery Game Puzzles
20.725.151.5
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
97.895.5100.0
Proofbench
54.031.050.0
SimpleBench
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
54.072.062.8
SimpleQA Verified
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
51.766.263.0
SWE-Bench verified
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
83.579.380.6
WeirdML
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
76.462.684.9
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
n/a37.544.9
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
n/a70.174.9
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
n/a50.254.8
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
1555.31505.5n/a
Deepswe
n/a37.467.0
Exploitbench
26.5n/a47.4
Frontiercode
38.5n/a43.0
Furniture Assembly
4.8n/a20.2
GSO-Bench
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
44.1n/a40.2
Mirrorcode
31.1n/a23.3
Osworld 2 0
18.2n/a13.0
PostTrainBench
24.3n/a23.9
Surface Evolver Bench
n/a58.188.1
Terminal Bench
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency.
80.2n/a84.7
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
ModelInputOutputContextProjected $/mo
Anthropic logoClaude Opus 4.7$5.00$25.001.0M tokens (~500 books)$100.00
Google DeepMind logoGemini 3.5 Flash$1.50$9.001.0M tokens (~524 books)$33.75
OpenAI logoGPT-5.5$5.00$30.001.1M tokens (~525 books)$112.50