Claude Opus 4.8vsGemini 3.6 Flash
Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemini 3.6 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Context window | 1M | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 95% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 69.2% | — |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | 84.4% | — |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | 63.8% | — |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.1Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 49% |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.0Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | 55.8% | — |
ML engineering MLE-BenchCan the AI do the work of a machine-learning engineer? It competes in real Kaggle competitions — building, training, and tuning models end to end — and the score reflects how well it places. Higher is better. | — | 63.9% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 88% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 74.6% | — |
Browser agent BU BenchCan the AI drive a real web browser to finish tasks — clicking, filling forms, and navigating sites the way a person would? Run by Browser Use on their BU Bench task set. Higher is better. | 74%Best | 68% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 84.3% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 49.8% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 57.9% | — |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 83.4%Best | 83% |
Agentic financial analysis Finance Agent v2Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 53.9% | — |
Agentic legal work Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkHarvey's test of whether an AI agent can complete real legal work — drafting and reviewing documents, working with spreadsheets and presentations, and navigating files the way a lawyer's assistant would. Higher is better. | 9.58% | — |
Tax questions TaxEval v2A set of real tax questions created by Vals AI — can the AI give accurate answers about tax rules and filings? Higher is better. | 75.63% | — |
Medical admin work MedScribeCan the AI support doctors with their administrative work, like notes and paperwork? Created by Vals AI. Higher is better. | 85.75% | — |
Knowledge work GDPval-AAMeasures how well the AI does economically valuable knowledge work, judged against human experts. Shown as a rating (like a chess Elo) — higher is better. | 1890 | — |
Knowledge work GDPval-AA v2economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | 1600Best | 1421 |
Community preference Arena Elo (Text)Real people chat with two anonymous AIs side by side and vote for the answer they prefer. Votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai — it measures which AI people actually like, not test scores. Higher is better. | 1482 | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1560 | — |
| Timeline | ||
| Release gap | Claude Opus 4.8 shipped 54 days before Gemini 3.6 Flash | |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | |
| Release date | May 28 2026 | Jul 21 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemini 3.6 Flash?
Claude Opus 4.8 leads Gemini 3.6 Flash on 3 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (BU Bench, OSWorld-Verified, GDPval-AA v2). Claude Opus 4.8 shipped 54 days before Gemini 3.6 Flash, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On BU Bench, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 74% vs Gemini 3.6 Flash at 68%. On OSWorld-Verified, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 83.4% vs Gemini 3.6 Flash at 83%. On GDPval-AA v2, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 1600 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash at 1421.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Opus 4.8 was released by Anthropic on May 28 2026.
Gemini 3.6 Flash was released by Google on Jul 21 2026.
Other comparisons
Claude Opus 4.8vsGPT-5.6 SolGemini 3.6 FlashvsGPT-5.6 SolClaude Opus 4.8vsMuse Spark 1.1Gemini 3.6 FlashvsMuse Spark 1.1Claude Opus 4.8vsGrok 4.5Gemini 3.6 FlashvsGrok 4.5Claude Opus 4.8vsDeepSeek-V4-ProGemini 3.6 FlashvsDeepSeek-V4-ProClaude Opus 4.8vsMistral Medium 3.5Gemini 3.6 FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5Claude Opus 4.8vsKimi K3Gemini 3.6 FlashvsKimi K3