Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 100k | 1M |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $1.50 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $7.50 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | — | $0.075 |
| — | $675Google list price | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
HumanEvalFunction synthesis — 164 small Python problems: the AI is given a function's description and has to write the working function. This was the coding benchmark of the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 era, before the field moved to fixing real bugs in real repositories. Higher is better. | 58.7% | — |
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1Agentic scientific computing — The same command-line setup as Terminal-Bench, pointed at scientific work: the AI has to drive research tooling and computational workflows through to a result, rather than administer a machine. Version 0.1 is the first release of the task set, and scores run lower than on the general board. Higher is better. | — | 51.4% |
Okapi Multilingual MMLUMultilingual knowledge — five-shot accuracy on the Okapi translations of MMLU used in the Claude 3 model card | 61.2% | — |
GSM8KGrade-school math — Grade-school maths word problems that take a few steps of arithmetic to work through. It separated the models of 2022 and 2023 sharply, then saturated. One caveat on the historical numbers: OpenAI included part of the GSM8K training set in GPT-4's pre-training mix, so GPT-4's score is not a clean few-shot result. Higher is better. | 86.7% | — |
OSWorld 2.1 · offlineAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Version 2.1, in its offline setting. Scores are not comparable with version 2.0. Higher is better. | — | 77.6% |
AutomationBench (Artificial Analysis)Business workflows — The same business-workflow test, run by Artificial Analysis rather than by the lab, and graded strict pass@1: a workflow counts only if the whole of it is right on the first attempt. Read it as a separate board from the lab-run AutomationBench scores. Higher is better. | — | 76.1% |
Vending-Bench 2 (USD)Business simulation — ending bank balance in US dollars in Andon Labs’ vending-business simulation; higher is better | — | 14549 |
Chartography · no toolsChart tasks — The same chart-centred test with no tools: the AI has to read each chart unaided. Scores run far lower than the with-tools version, so read the two as separate tests. Higher is better. | — | 66.6% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | |
| Release date | Aug 9 2023 | Nov 12 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Claude Instant 1.2vsGPT-6.1 TerraGemini 4 HydrogenvsGPT-6.1 TerraClaude Instant 1.2vsMuse EmberGemini 4 HydrogenvsMuse EmberClaude Instant 1.2vsGrok 4.7Gemini 4 HydrogenvsGrok 4.7Claude Instant 1.2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Gemini 4 HydrogenvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Claude Instant 1.2vsMistral Large 4Gemini 4 HydrogenvsMistral Large 4Claude Instant 1.2vsKimi K3.1 ProGemini 4 HydrogenvsKimi K3.1 ProFrequently asked questions
Claude Instant 1.2 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only Gemini 4 Hydrogen has a verified first-party price for an available API: $1.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens. No currently available pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Claude Instant 1.2. Claude Instant 1.2 shipped 1191 days before Gemini 4 Hydrogen, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 100k (Claude Instant 1.2) vs 1M (Gemini 4 Hydrogen).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Claude Instant 1.2 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.