CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Live
Explore
Compare
Decide
Track
Learn
…
CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

Theme:
Currency:
  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. Claude Opus 4.8 vs Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) benchmark

In this head-to-head showdown, Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) is more budget-friendly at $4.5/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.

Executive Comparison Verdict

Bottom Line: Choose Claude Opus 4.8 if your priority is peak reasoning, complex code generation, and top preference Elo. Choose Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) if you are optimizing for low latency, high throughput, and cost-efficient API deployment.
Share Analysis:Share:
WhatsAppTelegramXLinkedIn
Executive Verdict Summary

Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) holds empirical advantage (3 of 3 metrics)

Coding / SWESWE-bench
Claude Opus 4.8Top code solve rate
ReasoningGPQA / Live
Claude Opus 4.8Top logical accuracy
Best Value$/1M Tok
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)Lowest API billing cost
Speed / TokTok/Sec
Claude Opus 4.8Fastest stream rate

Verified Advantage Breakdown

3 benchmarks evaluated across capability, speed, and cost

Claude Opus 4.8 (0)Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) (3)
Claude Opus 4.8
0 of 3 Wins
Competitive baseline across remaining benchmarks
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)
3 of 3 Wins
✓Input price✓Output price✓Context window
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8

Prior Opus generation still billed at $5/$25. Kept as a compare baseline against Opus 5.

Opus 4.8Elo 1,598In: $5 · Out: $25/1M
Google
Leads 3 of 3
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)

Auto-discovered from OpenRouter (google/gemini-3.5-flash:batch). Preview until a second source matches.

In: $0.75 · Out: $4.5/1M

Claude 4 Series Lineage & Sibling Variants

5 models

Currently comparing Claude Opus 4.8 vs Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch). Alternative family tiers available.

Active: Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.5$25Claude Opus 4.6$25Claude Sonnet 4.5$15Claude Haiku 4.5$5

Claude Opus 4.8 Thinking Depth & Cost Scaler

Model A

Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost

Mode: Medium (16k budget)

Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.

Delay
330 ms
Standard
CoT Tokens
~3,200
Internal reasoning
Cost / 1k
$90.00
9.0× base bill
Accuracy Boost
+5.2%
STEM & Logic
Top Rival Showdowns for Claude Opus 4.8
All Matchups
Compare vs:vs GPT-5vs Gemini 3 Provs Grok 4.6vs DeepSeek V4 Provs Qwen 3 Max
Preference Leader

No shared data

Single model data

Throughput Leader

No shared data

No latency data

Value per Dollar LeaderGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) Wins

Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)

$4.5 / 1M output

Capability Percentiles

Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Leaders Matchup Capability Radar

Comparing top standard models across 6 key capability dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.

Tap any node to inspect
0–100 %ile

Overall Matchup Breakdown

Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.

Claude Opus 4.8 (7)vsGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) (3)
Claude Opus 4.8: 7W (70%)Overall: Claude Opus 4.8Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch): 3W (30%)
← Claude Opus 4.8Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) →
🏆Claude Opus 4.8 Leads(5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Benchmark
Claude Opus 4.8vsGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)
Preference Elo
1,598vs—
Coding Elo
1,604vs—
SWE-bench
78.4%vs—
LiveBench
73.6%vs—
GPQA Diamond
86.2%vs—
Claude Opus 4.8: 5WGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch): 0W
🏆Claude Opus 4.8 Leads(2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Benchmark
Claude Opus 4.8vsGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)
Output speed
66 tok/svs—
Time to first token
330 msvs—
Claude Opus 4.8: 2WGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch): 0W
🏆Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) Leads(3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Benchmark
Claude Opus 4.8vsGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)
Output price
$25/1Mvs$4.5/1M+$20.5/1M
Input price
$5/1Mvs$0.75/1M+$4.25/1M
Context window
1Mvs1M+49k
Claude Opus 4.8: 0WGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch): 3W

Side-by-Side Benchmark Matrix

Claude Opus 4.8Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)
Preference Elo
Claude Opus 4.81,598
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)—
Coding Elo
Claude Opus 4.81,604
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)—
LiveBench
Claude Opus 4.873.6%
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)—
SWE-bench
Claude Opus 4.878.4%
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)—
GPQA Diamond
Claude Opus 4.886.2%
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)—
Time to first token
Claude Opus 4.8330 ms
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)—
Output speed
Claude Opus 4.866 tok/s
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)—
Input priceGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) +$4.25/1M
Claude Opus 4.8$5/1M
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)$0.75/1M
Output priceGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) +$20.5/1M
Claude Opus 4.8$25/1M
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)$4.5/1M
Context windowGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) +49k
Claude Opus 4.81M
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)1M
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)Advantage Delta
Preference Elo
1,598
lmarena · Aug 16, 2026
——
Coding Elo
1,604
lmarena · Aug 16, 2026
——
LiveBench
73.6%
livebench · Aug 16, 2026
——
SWE-bench
78.4%
swebench · Aug 16, 2026
——
GPQA Diamond
86.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
——
Time to first token
330 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
——
Output speed
66 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
——
Input price
$5/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
$0.75/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
+$4.25/1M
Output price
$25/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
$4.5/1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
+$20.5/1M
Context window
1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
1M
openrouter · Aug 17, 2026
+49k

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save 83% with Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
Claude Opus 4.8$550.00 / mo
In: $175Out: $375
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)$93.75 / mo
In: $26.25Out: $67.5
Estimated Cost Delta

Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) is estimated to save $456.25/month ($5,475/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch):Pick Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) when you are optimizing output cost.
  • 2
    Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch):Pick Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) for million-token RAG or long-document jobs.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)

Lower output list price ($4.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)

Larger window (1M).

Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4.8

Claude Opus 4.8 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsinsufficient dataNeed SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chatGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)Lower output list price ($4.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient dataNeed TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAGGoogle: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)Larger window (1M).
Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4.8Claude Opus 4.8 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news
launchJun 20, 2026

Keep Opus 4.8 on the board: a baseline, not a flagship

Opus 4.8 still bills $5/$25. We keep it so Opus 5 vs 4.8 is a real generation delta, not marketing.

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Social Share Card Preview

Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/claude-opus-4-8-vs-gemini-3-5-flash-batch/opengraph-image

Save PNG

CompareLLM AI Matrix

Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry

LIVE BENCHMARK
VS
Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.8

Elo 1,598
SWE-bench78.4%
Speed (tok/s)66 tok/s
Input / 1M Tokens$5/1M
Output / 1M Tokens$25/1M
Google

Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)

Elo n/a
SWE-bench—
Speed (tok/s)1M
Input / 1M Tokens$0.75/1M
Output / 1M Tokens$4.5/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Opus 4.8 or Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)?
We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Claude Opus 4.8 or Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)?
SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) output tokens are $4.5/1M versus $25/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.8 or Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch)?
We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) accepts 1M tokens versus 1M.
Can I self-host either model?
Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Opus 4.8 and Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Related news

  • launch · Jun 20, 2026

    Keep Opus 4.8 on the board: a baseline, not a flagship

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude Opus 4.8 matchups →|All Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash (batch) matchups →
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.6 (previous opus)Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 5 (next opus)Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8Gemini 3.6 Pro vs Claude Opus 4.8Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.8Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8