High-performance model for real-world agents and coding.
Google's high-speed thinking model for agentic workflows, chat, and coding.
No shared agent demos for these models yet.
No captured outputs for these models yet.
Based on the Capability Index, Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher (86.2 vs 78.9). However, "better" depends on your use case — pricing, speed, context window, and specific capability needs all matter.
Gemini 3.5 Flash has a lower blended cost. Claude Sonnet 4.5: $3.00 input / $15.00 output. Gemini 3.5 Flash: $1.50 input / $9.00 output.
Gemini 3.5 Flash has a larger context window: Claude Sonnet 4.5 supports 1M tokens vs Gemini 3.5 Flash at 1M tokens.
Yes, both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash support vision/image input.
Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on SWE-bench Verified: Claude Sonnet 4.5 resolves 71% vs Gemini 3.5 Flash at 79%.
Key differences: Gemini 3.5 Flash has a notably higher capability index (7.3 point gap). Compare full specs on this page.
If cost is your priority, choose the cheaper option. If you need the highest intelligence for complex tasks, pick the higher-scoring model. For long documents or codebases, choose the larger context window. You can try both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3.5 Flash for free on idapt.app to see which performs better for your specific needs.