Model Comparison

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Claude 3.7 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is 34.3x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

Claude 3.7 Sonnet outperforms in 4 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA, MMMU, SWE-Bench Verified), while Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 30.0x more expensive than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 37.5x more expensive than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.7 Sonnet is more expensive than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerGoogle
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude 3.7 Sonnet's 200,000 tokens. Claude 3.7 Sonnet can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite uses Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.7 Sonnet was released on 2025-02-24, while Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite was released on 2025-06-17.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is 4 months newer than Claude 3.7 Sonnet.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Feb 24, 2025

1.1 years ago

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Jun 17, 2025

10 months ago

3mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-01, while Claude 3.7 Sonnet's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite's training data extends to 2025-01-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude 3.7 Sonnet's cutoff date.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

—

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Jan 2025

Provider Availability

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is available from Google.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Higher AIME 2025 score (54.8% vs 49.8%)
Higher GPQA score (84.8% vs 64.6%)
Higher MMMU score (75.0% vs 72.9%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (70.3% vs 31.6%)
Google
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
AnthropicClaude 3.7 Sonnet
GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Compare in Playground

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Claude 3.7 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.7 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores MATH-500: 96.2%, IFEval: 93.2%, MMMLU: 86.1%, GPQA: 84.8%, TAU-bench Retail: 81.2%. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores FACTS Grounding: 84.1%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 81.1%, MMMU: 72.9%, GPQA: 64.6%, Vibe-Eval: 51.3%.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is 30.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output via google.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (200K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.10/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is developed by Google.