Claude Opus 4.6
Not tested yet
Head-to-head comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 vs. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Compare published benchmark results from matching versions and cohorts, API pricing, and technical specifications. Any documented test setup differences remain visible.
- shared result series
- 9
- distinct benchmarks
- 7
- latest retrieval
- 2026-09-02
Change model selection
Specifications
General specifications
Release date, availability, context window, architecture, and published parameter counts at a glance. Undisclosed details remain marked as unavailable.
| Attribute | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Released | Feb 2026 | Feb 19, 2026 |
| Availability | Active | Preview |
| Model type | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Parameters | Not published | Not published |
| Architecture | Not published | Not published |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Knowledge cutoff | May 2025 | Not published |
| Technical sources | Model, Context | Model |
Pricing
API pricing compared
The table compares official standard API rates per 1M tokens, including published cache pricing. Batch, fast, priority, regional surcharges, tool calls, and cloud platform pricing are excluded.
| Price type | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| API input | $5 | $2 ≤200K / $4 >200K |
| API output | $25 | $12 ≤200K / $18 >200K |
| Cache read | $0.5 | $0.2 ≤200K / $0.4 >200K |
| Cache write (5 min.) | $6.25 | Not listed |
| Cache write (1 hr.) | $10 | Not listed |
| Price verified | 07/30/2026 Source | 07/30/2026 Source |
Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
API inputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier
Claude Opus 4.6$5
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLower price$2
API outputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier
Claude Opus 4.6$25
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLower price$12
Cache readUSD per 1M tokens, base tier
Claude Opus 4.6$0.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewLower price$0.2
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie
Pricing by provider
Direct developer pricing and provider endpoint tariffs routed through OpenRouter are listed separately. Prices are in USD per 1M tokens. Context-dependent direct tiers plus regional, Flex, Priority, and other OpenRouter tariffs remain individually identifiable.
| Model | Provider | Purchase route and tariff | Input per 1M tokens | Output per 1M tokens | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.6 | Anthropic | Direct from developerStandard API | Lowest listed price: $5 | Lowest listed price: $25 | Source07/30/2026 |
| Amazon Bedrock | Via OpenRouteramazon-bedrock | Lowest listed price: $5 | Lowest listed price: $25 | Source09/12/2026 | |
| Anthropic | Via OpenRouteranthropic | Lowest listed price: $5 | Lowest listed price: $25 | Source09/12/2026 | |
| Azure | Via OpenRouterazure/global | Lowest listed price: $5 | Lowest listed price: $25 | Source09/12/2026 | |
| Claude Platform on AWS | Via OpenRouterclaude-on-aws | Lowest listed price: $5 | Lowest listed price: $25 | Source09/12/2026 | |
| Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/europe | $5.5 | $27.5 | Source09/12/2026 | ||
| Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global | Lowest listed price: $5 | Lowest listed price: $25 | Source09/12/2026 | ||
| Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Direct from developerUp to 200,000 context tokens | $2 | $12 | Source07/30/2026 | |
| Direct from developerAbove 200,000 context tokens | $4 | $18 | Source07/30/2026 | ||
| Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global | $2 | $12 | Source09/12/2026 | ||
| Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global/flex | Lowest listed price: $1 | Lowest listed price: $6 | Source09/12/2026 | ||
| Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global/priority | $3.6 | $21.6 | Source09/12/2026 | ||
| Google AI Studio | Via OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio | $2 | $12 | Source09/12/2026 | |
| Google AI Studio | Via OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio/flex | Lowest listed price: $1 | Lowest listed price: $6 | Source09/12/2026 | |
| Google AI Studio | Via OpenRoutergoogle-ai-studio/priority | $3.6 | $21.6 | Source09/12/2026 |
Performance
Shared benchmarks
Only published results with the same benchmark version, task, metric, and comparison cohort are paired. Different reasoning levels, agents, harnesses, or output limits appear directly in the table.
Capability profile from matched benchmarks
Each axis averages directly matched benchmark families. A value of 100 means the stronger value within this pair, not a universal quality score.
Not enough directly matched categories for a reliable radar
Only 1 of at least 5 categories have comparable, direct model measurements. The benchmark tables below show the available evidence without filling missing axes.
Claude Opus 4.6Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Humanity's Last ExamOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference
Claude Opus 4.634.44% ± 1.86
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewWinner46.44% ± 1.96
MultiChallengeOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.656.02% ± 1.08
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewHigher measured value71.37% ± 1.74
MultiNRCOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.648.34% ± 3.02
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewHigher measured value64.74% ± 2.88
PRBench FinanceOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.6Higher measured value53.28% ± 0.18
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview41.87% ± 1.22
PRBench LegalOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.6Higher measured value52.27% ± 0.66
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview44.02% ± 1.12
TutorBenchOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.6Higher measured value53.55% ± 1.01
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview52.99% ± 1.06
VisualToolBenchOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.627.52% ± 1.45
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewHigher measured value28.97% ± 0.91
MultiNRCOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.657.06% ± 2.99
Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewHigher measured value64.74% ± 2.88
TutorBenchOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical
Claude Opus 4.6Higher measured value53.68% ± 1.02
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview52.99% ± 1.06
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie
| Benchmark and task | Claude Opus 4.6 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
Humanity's Last ExamOverallTest detailsNo documented difference in the test setupVersion: final 2,500-question public setMetric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Snapshot: claude-opus-4-6-thinking-max, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Snapshot: gemini-3.1-pro-preview-thinking-high, Attempts: pass@1All 2,500 public questions, temperature 0, and an automatic answer extractor. | 34.44% ± 1.86 95% confidence interval: ±1.86 | Winner46.44% ± 1.96 95% confidence interval: ±1.96 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 09/02/2026 |
MultiChallengeOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: four multi-turn challenge typesMetric: rubric pass rateScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1Multi-turn conversations with binary task-specific rubrics. | 56.02% ± 1.08 95% confidence interval: ±1.08 | Higher measured value71.37% ± 1.74 95% confidence interval: ±1.74 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
MultiNRCOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: French, Spanish, and Chinese releaseMetric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1Native, non-translated reasoning tasks with automatic evaluation. | 48.34% ± 3.02 95% confidence interval: ±3.02 | Higher measured value64.74% ± 2.88 95% confidence interval: ±2.88 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
PRBench FinanceOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: full finance setMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1600 finance tasks with task-specific rubrics and o4-mini as judge. | Higher measured value53.28% ± 0.18 95% confidence interval: ±0.18 | 41.87% ± 1.22 95% confidence interval: ±1.22 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
PRBench LegalOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: full legal setMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1500 legal tasks with task-specific rubrics and o4-mini as judge. | Higher measured value52.27% ± 0.66 95% confidence interval: ±0.66 | 44.02% ± 1.12 95% confidence interval: ±1.12 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
TutorBenchOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1,490-task releaseMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: none, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@11,490 tasks with weighted rubrics and Claude 4 Sonnet as judge. | Higher measured value53.55% ± 1.01 95% confidence interval: ±1.01 | 52.99% ± 1.06 95% confidence interval: ±1.06 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
VisualToolBenchOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1,204-task releaseMetric: average pass rateScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: thinking, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@11,204 tasks, six tools, and at most 20 tool calls per task. | 27.52% ± 1.45 95% confidence interval: ±1.45 | Higher measured value28.97% ± 0.91 95% confidence interval: ±0.91 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
MultiNRCOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: French, Spanish, and Chinese releaseMetric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: max, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@1Native, non-translated reasoning tasks with automatic evaluation. | 57.06% ± 2.99 95% confidence interval: ±2.99 | Higher measured value64.74% ± 2.88 95% confidence interval: ±2.88 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
TutorBenchOverallTest detailsTest setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1,490-task releaseMetric: weighted rubric scoreScoring: Higher is betterClaude Opus 4.6: Reasoning: max, Attempts: pass@1 Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Attempts: pass@11,490 tasks with weighted rubrics and Claude 4 Sonnet as judge. | Higher measured value53.68% ± 1.02 95% confidence interval: ±1.02 | 52.99% ± 1.06 95% confidence interval: ±1.06 | Scale AISource detailsData as of: 08/26/2026 |
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie | |||
Our model tests
Community tests you can inspect
Compare how the models respond to the same prompt. Each test shows the first attempt, with no subsequent fixes to the generated code. These results do not contribute to an overall score.
Pelican on a bicycle
A community classic for free-form SVG drawing.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
API access was unavailable for this run. The model was not evaluated.
First attempt
- Run date
- 7 Sept 2026
- API provider
- openrouter
- Requested API model
- google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview
- Pinned endpoint
- Google AI Studio | google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview-20260219
- Reasoning setting
- high
- Temperature
- Provider default
- Token limit including reasoning
- 8,192 tokens
- Test protocol
- community-visual-tests-v1
- Technical checks
- Not run
Not yet visually reviewed. A successful recording does not confirm correct physics or full compliance with the prompt.
Prompt and test conditions
Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle
Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens
Task origin (Simon Willison)How to read this comparison
Winning one benchmark is not an overall verdict
Your workload, budget, and required context length matter most. A coding benchmark says little about visual understanding or agent performance.
The standard price table uses direct developer rates. The provider comparison labels OpenRouter endpoints, regions, and special tariffs separately.
Every result links to its measurement source and retrieval date. Labels distinguish vendor reports, official benchmark leaderboards, and independent evaluations. Disputed or archived results are excluded.
More matchups
Related LLM comparisons
Compare Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview with other leading models using the same data and benchmark logic.