Which model is better: Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is 68.8% cheaper for input tokens ($1.25 vs. $4.00 per 1M tokens) and $10.00 vs. $20.00 for output tokens (3.2x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Claude Opus 5.5 delivers lower response latency at 680ms TTFT (20ms faster than Gemini 2.5 Pro) with 95 vs. 80 tok/s throughput. Claude Opus 5.5 leads coding evaluations at 89.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 63.8% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 93.2% vs. 74.0% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude Opus 5.5
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$1.25
Gemini 2.5 Pro is 3.2x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$20.00
$10.00
Gemini 2.5 Pro (50.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.200
$0.313
Claude Opus 5.5 is 1.6x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$5.00
$1.25
Gemini 2.5 Pro is 4.0x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
1,024k (128k out)
1,024k (66k out)
Equal Context Window
Avg TTFT Response Latency
680ms
700ms
Claude Opus 5.5 (20ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
95 tok/s
80 tok/s
Claude Opus 5.5 (+15 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
89.9%
63.8%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+26.1% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
93.2%
74%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+19.2% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
92.1%
85.2%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+6.9% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98%
95%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+3.0% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
57.8 / 100
56.8 / 100
Claude Opus 5.5 (+1 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
Choose Gemini 2.5 Pro (Google) for long-context document and video analysis, large codebase ingestion, and multimodal reasoning — offering a 1,024k context window, 700ms TTFT, and $1.25/1M input pricing ($0.312/1M cached reads).
Which is cheaper: Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper at $1.25/1M input tokens ($10.00/1M output) compared to $4.00/1M input ($20.00/1M output) for Claude Opus 5.5.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Claude Opus 5.5 delivers faster first-token latency at 680ms TTFT (95 tok/s throughput) compared to 700ms TTFT (80 tok/s) for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
How do Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 2.5 Pro compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 89.9% versus 63.8% for Gemini 2.5 Pro. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 93.2% versus 74% for Gemini 2.5 Pro (and 98% vs 95% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude Opus 5.5?
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Choose Gemini 2.5 Pro (Google) for long-context document and video analysis, large codebase ingestion, and multimodal reasoning — offering a 1,024k context window, 700ms TTFT, and $1.25/1M input pricing ($0.312/1M cached reads).
