Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Geprüft vom GetInfoUs-ForschungsteamZuletzt geprüft: October 2026Redaktionelle Richtlinien

Beliebige Modelle wechseln & vergleichen

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Claude Opus 4.1Profile

Gemini 2.5 Computer UseProfile

Multi-Model Arena Stack:

5-Model Matrix Workbench

Popular Matchups:

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.1

Autonomes Agenten-Modell

Claude Opus 4.1 von Anthropic ist ein KI-Modell für autonome Agenten-Workflows, zuverlässiges Tool-Calling und mehrstufige Automatisierung mit 200K Kontextfenster, 46 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 62/100 und $15/$75 pro 1M

Intelligence Index62 / 100

Input Token:

$15.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$75.00 / 1M

Context Window:

200K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

74.5%

Google

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use

Autonomes Agenten-Modell

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use von Google ist ein KI-Modell für autonome Agenten-Workflows, zuverlässiges Tool-Calling und mehrstufige Automatisierung mit 128K Kontextfenster, 85 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 65/100 und $1.5/$8 pr

Intelligence Index65 / 100

Input Token:

$1.50 / 1M

Output Token:

$8.00 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Wichtigste Unterschiede auf einen Blick

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use is 9.2x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
Claude Opus 4.1 has a larger context window (200K vs 128K tokens).
Gemini 2.5 Computer Use is faster at 85 tok/s vs 46 tok/s.

Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →

Feature	Claude Opus 4.1	Gemini 2.5 Computer Use
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)	62	65
Provider	Anthropic	Google
Input Price Cost per million input tokens	$15.00 / 1M	$1.50 / 1M
Output Price Cost per million output tokens	$75.00 / 1M	$8.00 / 1M
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M	$11.55 / 1M	$1.36 / 1M
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens	200K tokens~300 A4 pages of text	128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens Per single request	32K	16K
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second	46 tok/s	85 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering	74.5%	N/A
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning	74.4%	N/A
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens	$1.50 / 1M	$0.38 / 1M

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

At-a-glance decision framework

Coding

Evaluations ongoing

Cost

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use

9.2x cheaper monthly runtime

Speed

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use

+85% faster generation

Context

Claude Opus 4.1

200K tokens window

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Claude Opus 4.1Gemini 2.5 Computer Use

SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

74.5%vsN/A

GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

74.4%vsN/A

MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

86.8%vsN/A

LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1372ptsvs1365pts

Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

45%vs45.2%

Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

46 tok/s vs85 tok/s

Latenz & Antwortzeit

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better

Claude Opus 4.11.70s

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use0.65s

Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time

Claude Opus 4.112.57s

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use6.53s

Interaktiver Token-Kosten-Simulator

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

Daily Input Tokens100K / day

10K500K1M

Daily Output Tokens30K / day

5K150K300K

Prompt Cache Hit Ratio50% cached

0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)

Claude Opus 4.1 Monthly API Bill

$92.25 / month

$15/1M in · $75/1M out

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Monthly API Bill

$10.01 / month

$1.5/1M in · $8/1M out

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use saves approximately $82.24 / month (89%) under this workload.9.2x Savings

Claude Opus 4.1 · Strengths & Key Advantages

200K Kontextfenster und bis zu 32K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 74.5% · GPQA Diamond 74.4%)
Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 46 Token/Sekunde bei nur 1700 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
Effiziente API-Struktur ($15/$75 pro 1M Token) inklusive Prompt-Caching, Tool-Calling und strikter JSON-Ausgabe

Considerations & Trade-offs

Proprietäres Cloud-Modell ohne Möglichkeit zum lokalen Download der Modellgewichte
Bei hohem Anfragevolumen empfiehlt sich der Einsatz von Prompt-Caching und Batch-API zur Kostenoptimierung

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use · Strengths & Key Advantages

128K Kontextfenster und bis zu 16K maximale Output-Token (Arena Elo 1365)
Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 85 Token/Sekunde bei nur 650 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
Effiziente API-Struktur ($1.5/$8 pro 1M Token) inklusive Prompt-Caching, Tool-Calling und strikter JSON-Ausgabe

Considerations & Trade-offs

Proprietäres Cloud-Modell ohne Möglichkeit zum lokalen Download der Modellgewichte
Bei extrem komplexen mehrstufigen Forschungsfragen bieten schwere Reasoning-Spezialmodelle noch tiefere Analysen

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

Metric	Claude Opus 4.1	Gemini 2.5 Computer Use
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task	$16.46	$1.15
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task	72K	15K
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task	37K	6K

Technische Spezifikationen

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

Feature	Claude Opus 4.1	Gemini 2.5 Computer Use
Official API Model ID (SDK)	claude-opus-4-1-20250801	models/gemini-2-5-computer-use
API Protocol	Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI	Google Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDK
Release Date	2025-08	2025-10
Knowledge Cutoff	March 2025	June 2025
Architecture	Refined Frontier Reasoning Transformer	Action-grounded vision-language agent model
Parameters	Confidential	Confidential
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)	4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 800,000 – 2,000,000 TPM	10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 800,000 – 2,000,000 TPM
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)	Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens	Flat rate ($1.5/1M in) across full 128K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTL	$1.5/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL	Implicit + Explicit Context Caching at $0.375/1M with configurable TTL
Computer Use / GUI Agent	Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)	Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)
MCP & Parallel Tool Calling	Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema	Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & Sandbox	Native Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors	Built-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution Sandbox
Official Fine-Tuning Support	Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation	Vertex AI Supervised Adapter Tuning & Context Distillation
Multimodal Token Billing	Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)	Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAM	Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)	Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)
Safety & Frontier Classification	Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated	Google DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework Verified
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)	SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier	SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier
Input Modalities	text, vision	text, vision
Output Modalities	text	text

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Claude Opus 4.1 or Gemini 2.5 Computer Use?

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use is more intelligent. It scores 65 compared with 62 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use is faster, generating 85 tokens per second compared with 46 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use is cheaper at $1.36 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $11.55 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.65s compared with 1.70s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Claude Opus 4.1 has a larger context window, supporting 200K tokens compared with 128K tokens.

Fazit

Sowohl Claude Opus 4.1 (Optimal für autonome Agenten-Workflows, zuverlässiges Tool-Calling und mehrstufige Automatisierung, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) als auch Gemini 2.5 Computer Use (Optimal für autonome Agenten-Workflows, zuverlässiges Tool-Calling und mehrstufige Automatisierung, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) überzeugen im Produktionseinsatz: Gemini 2.5 Computer Use führt bei komplexem Reasoning und Coding, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use liefert den höheren Token-Durchsatz und Gemini 2.5 Computer Use ist die kosteneffizienteste Wahl für große API-Workloads.

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Welches Modell ist besser für Coding und Reasoning – Claude Opus 4.1 oder Gemini 2.5 Computer Use?+

Im Gesamt-Intelligenzindex und bei Software-Benchmarks liegt Gemini 2.5 Computer Use vorn. Prüfen Sie oben die SWE-bench- und GPQA-Werte für Ihren Anwendungsfall.

Wie unterscheiden sich die API-Preise von Claude Opus 4.1 und Gemini 2.5 Computer Use?+

Claude Opus 4.1 kostet $15.00 / $75.00 pro 1M Input-/Output-Tokens, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use liegt bei $1.50 / $8.00. Beim gewichteten Gesamtpreis ist Gemini 2.5 Computer Use günstiger.

Welches Modell hat das größere Kontextfenster und die höhere Geschwindigkeit?+

Claude Opus 4.1 bietet 200K Tokens Kontext gegenüber 128K Tokens bei Gemini 2.5 Computer Use. Bei der Generierungsgeschwindigkeit liegt Gemini 2.5 Computer Use vorn.

AI Terminology & Guide

Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Tokens & Pricing Context Window AI Benchmarks Reasoning Models Tool Calling Model Context Protocol (MCP)

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use

Beliebige Modelle wechseln & vergleichen

Claude Opus 4.1

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

Latenz & Antwortzeit

Interaktiver Token-Kosten-Simulator

Claude Opus 4.1 · Strengths & Key Advantages

Considerations & Trade-offs

Gemini 2.5 Computer Use · Strengths & Key Advantages

Considerations & Trade-offs

Token Use & Task Economics

Technische Spezifikationen

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Fazit

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Related reading