The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash

Gemini 3.5 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 42.0 to 36.6. Gemini 3.5 Flash is 1.8x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 3.5 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 42.0 to 36.6, ranking #66 overall.

In the 10 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Gemini 3.5 Flash wins 6; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Gemini 3.5 Flash is roughly 1.8x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Gemini 3.5 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6

  • you want predictable pricing at $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output

Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 42.0 and ranks #66 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 10 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 1.8x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped May 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 4.6
Anthropic
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Google
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
36.6
#92
42.0
#66
Reasoning
37.9
#81
43.2
#53
Coding
24.6
#88
29.5
#62
Agents
23.6
#73
28.3
#58
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
4 of 10
6 of 10
Input price
$3.00 / M
$1.50 / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
$9.00 / M
Context window
200,000
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

6 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Math
34.7#49
30.8#79
Vision
25.8#58
31.6#29
Tool use
20.3#67
29.4#18
Long context
10.8#73
7.5#97
Multimodal
20.1#83
32.5#23
1 more shared indexes
Finance
30.0#24
30.2#23
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

17 reported for Claude Sonnet 4.6 · 16 for Gemini 3.5 Flash

10 shared

Claude Sonnet 4.6 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (Finance Agent, Humanity's Last Exam, Legal Agent Benchmark, LiveBench), while Gemini 3.5 Flash is better at 6 benchmarks (ARC-AGI v2, DeepSWE 1.1, Finance Agent v2, MCP Atlas, MMMU-Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.0).

Gemini 3.5 Flash has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemini 3.5 Flash costs less

For input processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 2.0x more expensive than Gemini 3.5 Flash ($1.50/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Gemini 3.5 Flash ($9.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 4.6 is more expensive than Gemini 3.5 Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Google
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Input tokens$1.50
Output tokens$9.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Claude Sonnet 4.6's 200,000 tokens. Gemini 3.5 Flash can generate longer responses up to 1,000,000 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Google
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output1,000,000 tokens
Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.5 Flash support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4.6 was released on 2026-02-17, while Gemini 3.5 Flash was released on 2026-05-19.

Gemini 3.5 Flash is 3 months newer than Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Feb 17, 2026

8 months ago

Gemini 3.5 Flash

May 19, 2026

5 months ago

3mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.5 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-31, while Claude Sonnet 4.6's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 3.5 Flash's training data extends to 2026-01-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Sonnet 4.6's cutoff date.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

—

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Jan 2026

Provider Availability

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is available from Anthropic, DeepInfra. Gemini 3.5 Flash is available from DeepInfra, Google.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

Gemini 3.5 Flash

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $1.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $9.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $1.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $9.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.5 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 4.6
✓ Preferred
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Gemini 3.5 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 42.0 to 36.6. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is made by Anthropic and Gemini 3.5 Flash is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Sonnet 4.6 compare to Gemini 3.5 Flash in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores Tau2 Telecom: 97.9%, Tau2 Retail: 91.7%, GPQA: 89.9%, MMMLU: 89.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 79.6%. Gemini 3.5 Flash scores CharXiv-R: 84.2%, MCP Atlas: 83.6%, MMMU-Pro: 83.6%, OSWorld-Verified: 78.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 76.2%.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 cheaper than Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is 2.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. Gemini 3.5 Flash costs $1.50/M input and $9.00/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 200K tokens and Gemini 3.5 Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (36.6 vs 42.0), context window (200K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($3.00 vs $1.50/M). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and Gemini 3.5 Flash is developed by Google.

Related comparisons