text model comparison
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon are both current text models, from Anthropic and Google. Gemini 4 Carbon is 50% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Opus 5.5, $2 vs $4. On Arena Text, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 1509 Elo and Gemini 4 Carbon 1528 Elo (Arena, measured October 28, 2026).
- Higher Arena Text
- Gemini 4 Carbon1528 Elo against 1509 Elo
- Lower price per 1M input tokens
- Gemini 4 Carbon$2 against $4
- Newer release
- Gemini 4 CarbonOct 2026 against Sep 2026
Data verified November 5, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-05
Side by side
Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon, line by line
Prices in effect today, compared at the same tier wherever both list one. The better value in each row is highlighted.
| Fact | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
|---|---|---|
| Price | ||
| Price per 1M input tokens | $4 | $2 (better) |
| Price per 1M output tokens | $20 | $10 (better) |
| Independent benchmarks | ||
| Arena Text | 1509 Elo (#3 of 52) | 1528 Elo (#1 of 52) (better) |
| Arena WebDev | 1810 Elo (#1 of 46) (better) | 1768 Elo (#4 of 46) |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% (#25 of 41) | Not measured |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) | 91.2% (#3 of 41) | Not measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% (#5 of 38) | Not measured |
| Specs | ||
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Release date | September 22, 2026 | October 28, 2026 |
| Access | API only | limited access |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | Not reported |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | Not reported |
| Input | text, image | text, image |
| Output | text | text |
Provider results
What the labs report
Results tables a lab published with one of its models, where it lists both Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon. These are the lab's own figures, not independent measurements, and each table is read on its own: labs run benchmarks with different harnesses and budgets.
Google, Gemini 4 Carbon launch table, October 28, 2026Google · 2026-11-05
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
|---|---|---|
| ExploitGym | 34.5% | 54.8% (better) |
| CWE-bench | 67.0% | 71.0% (better) |
| SWE-sweep | 3.6% | 9.6% (better) |
| FrontierSWE 2 | 62.3% (better) | 61.2% |
| Agents' Last Exam v1.1score | 71.6% | 77.4% (better) |
| OSWorld-2.1offline subset | 87.2% (better) | 81.5% |
| AutomationBenchZapier | 42.5% | 53.9% (better) |
| Vending-Bench 2bank balance | $9,235 | $16,484 (better) |
| Chartography | 66.3% | 72.5% (better) |
| Blueprint-Bench 2similarity score | 51.2% | 58.6% (better) |
| GraphWalks256K to 1M tokens, BFS F1 | 66.8% | 96.2% (better) |
| RiemannBench | 69.6% | 80.0% (better) |
Google's table from the Gemini 4 Carbon announcement, evaluated without guardrails; Google publishes its methodology at deepmind.google/models/evals-methodology/gemini-4-carbon. The cybersecurity rows, Google's headline, come first. Left out here: the Artificial Analysis and Vals indexes and the two rows Artificial Analysis ran (Terminal-Bench 4.0 and Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1).
Charts
Against every current text model
Where Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon land among the current models of their task, on every independent benchmark, on price and on context.
Where each stands
On Arena Text, Claude Opus 5.5 ranks #3 and Gemini 4 Carbon #1 of 52 current models. Each bar is the share of current models it beats: on score, price and context.
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text
Claude Opus 5.5:#3of 52
1,509 Elo · ahead of 96%
Gemini 4 Carbon:#1of 52
1,528 Elo · ahead of 100%
Arena WebDev
Claude Opus 5.5:#1of 46
1,810 Elo · ahead of 100%
Gemini 4 Carbon:#4of 46
1,768 Elo · ahead of 93%
GPQA Diamond
Claude Opus 5.5:#25of 41
90.6% · ahead of 40%
Gemini 4 Carbon: Not scored
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
Claude Opus 5.5:#3of 41
91.2% · ahead of 95%
Gemini 4 Carbon: Not scored
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Opus 5.5:#5of 38
72.2% · ahead of 89%
Gemini 4 Carbon: Not scored
Price and context
Price per 1M input tokens
Claude Opus 5.5:#45of 55
$4 · cheaper than 15%
Gemini 4 Carbon:#30of 55
$2 · cheaper than 24%
Price per 1M output tokens
Claude Opus 5.5:#45of 55
$20 · cheaper than 15%
Gemini 4 Carbon:#35of 55
$10 · cheaper than 26%
Context window
Claude Opus 5.5:#26of 64
1M tokens · longer than 22%
Gemini 4 Carbon: Not listed
Quality against price
Claude Opus 5.5 scores 1,509 at $8; Gemini 4 Carbon scores 1,528 at $4 (blended price per 1M tokens). The line joins the current models no other beats on both price and Arena Text score; hover any point to name it.
Quality against price: the data
| Model | Provider | Blended price per 1M tokens | Arena Text (Elo) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini 4 Carbon | $4 | 1,528 | |
| Gemini 4 Argon | $4 | 1,520 | |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Anthropic | $8 | 1,509 |
| Muse Wonder | Meta | $8 | 1,507 |
| Claude Fable 5 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | $1.50 | 1,496 | |
| Muse Spark 1.3 | Meta | $2 | 1,495 |
| Claude Opus 5 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,492 |
| Kimi K3 | Moonshot Kimi | $6 | 1,488 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | OpenAI | $8 | 1,485 |
| Gemini 3.6 Flash | $3 | 1,483 | |
| GPT-5.5 | OpenAI | $11 | 1,482 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,482 |
| Qwen3.8-Max | Alibaba Qwen | $3 | 1,482 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,481 |
| GLM-5.3 | Z.ai | $2.15 | 1,481 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.54 | 1,480 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,477 |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | Z.ai | $0.24 | 1,477 |
| GPT-6 Astra | OpenAI | $20 | 1,476 |
| DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | DeepSeek | $0.52 | 1,476 |
| GPT-5.4 | OpenAI | $5.63 | 1,475 |
| Gemini 3 Flash Preview | $1.13 | 1,473 | |
| Grok 4.20 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,472 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | OpenAI | $4.50 | 1,467 |
| Grok 4.5 | xAI | $3 | 1,465 |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | DeepSeek | $1.98 | 1,465 |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,462 |
| GPT-6 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,458 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | $0.85 | 1,456 | |
| Grok 4.6 | xAI | $3 | 1,455 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.45 | 1,453 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.18 | 1,448 |
| Step 5 Preview | StepFun | $1.43 | 1,448 |
| Grok 4.3 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,442 |
| GPT-6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.20 | 1,441 |
| Grok 4.7 | xAI | $3 | 1,441 |
| Mistral Large 4 | Mistral AI | $1.05 | 1,432 |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Anthropic | $0.20 | 1,425 |
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | $3.50 | 1,415 |
| Solar Pro 4 | Upstage | $0.52 | 1,388 |
| GPT-4.1 mini | OpenAI | $0.70 | 1,383 |
| GPT-4.1 nano | OpenAI | $0.18 | 1,322 |
Cost
What each costs
Example workloads at each provider's listed rates, then every other rate either one lists. The cheaper figure in each row is highlighted.
The same work, priced
For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5.5 costs 2.0 times as much as Gemini 4 Carbon, at each provider's listed rates.
10M input and 2M output tokens
Claude Opus 5.5 costs 2.0× as much
- Claude Opus 5.5
- $80
- Gemini 4 Carbon
- $40
The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached
Claude Opus 5.5 costs 2.0× as much
- Claude Opus 5.5
- $45.80
- Gemini 4 Carbon
- $22.90
| Workload or rate | Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
|---|---|---|
| Example workloads | ||
| 10M input and 2M output tokens | $80 | $40 (better) |
| The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached | $45.80 | $22.90 (better) |
| The same, through the batch API | $40 | Not listed |
| Other listed rates | ||
| 1M input tokens, cached | $0.20 | $0.10 (better) |
| 1M input tokens, 5-minute cache write | $5 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, 1-hour cache write | $8 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, batch | $2 | Not listed |
| 1M output tokens, batch | $10 | Not listed |
Your own bill will differ. These figures use list prices and example workloads. The AI Model Cost Audit reviews your real usage, shortlists models that score as well for each task for less, and estimates the savings.
Launch price $100, regular price $150
Verdict
When to choose each
Claude Opus 5.5
Where it leads
- Higher Arena WebDev score, 1810 Elo vs 1768 Elo
- Batch pricing, $2 input and $10 output per 1M tokens
Best for
- Long-running agentic coding and knowledge work as the general-purpose default
- Cache-heavy agent loops where the 0.05x read multiplier compounds
Watch out for
- The API effort default is medium here, not high as on Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Sonnet 5.5, so a like-for-like comparison has to set effort explicitly
- The 4.7-generation tokenizer produces roughly 30% more tokens for the same text than Claude Sonnet 4.6 and earlier, so per-token rates do not compare directly across generations
Gemini 4 Carbon
Where it leads
- Lower input and output prices, $2 and $10 vs $4 and $20 per 1M tokens
- Higher Arena Text score, 1528 Elo vs 1509 Elo
- Cheaper cached input, $0.10 vs $0.20 per 1M tokens
Best for
- Finding, validating and patching vulnerabilities, for teams in Google's Fairwind Program
- Long-horizon engineering over very long inputs, once access opens
Watch out for
- Limited access: Google gives it first to a small group of cyber defenders, then to more trusted partners through its Fairwind Program, which governments, healthcare providers and telecoms apply to; there is no public API or app access yet
- The $2 and $10 rates are introductory, with cached input 95% off; after an introductory period Google has not dated, $4 input and $20 output per 1M tokens apply
- In Google's own table it trails GPT-6 Astra on FrontierSWE 2 (61.2% against 65.5%) and Claude Opus 5.5 on OSWorld-2.1 (81.5% against 87.2%)
- Google publishes no context window or output limit for Carbon yet
From benchmark to production
Building on Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 4 Carbon?
Public scores rarely hold on your own data. We test both models on your real tasks, then build the agent or pipeline around the one that wins.
AI Model Cost AuditLaunch price $100, regular price $150What the audit includes
FAQ
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 4 Carbon?
Gemini 4 Carbon is 50% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Opus 5.5, $2 vs $4. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5.5 costs $80 and Gemini 4 Carbon $40 at standard rates.
Which is cheaper with prompt caching, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 4 Carbon?
Claude Opus 5.5 charges $0.20 per 1M cached input tokens, 95% below its standard input rate, and Gemini 4 Carbon $0.10, 95% below. With 9M of 10M input tokens cached and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5.5 costs $45.80 and Gemini 4 Carbon $22.90.
Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 4 Carbon?
Gemini 4 Carbon leads on Arena Text, 1528 Elo to 1509 Elo; Claude Opus 5.5 leads on Arena WebDev, 1810 Elo to 1768 Elo. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.
How do Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon compare in Google's own results?
In Gemini 4 Carbon launch table (October 28, 2026), Gemini 4 Carbon leads on ExploitGym, 54.8% to 34.5%; Gemini 4 Carbon leads on CWE-bench, 71.0% to 67.0%; Gemini 4 Carbon leads on SWE-sweep, 9.6% to 3.6%. These are Google's figures, not independent measurements.
Further reading
More on Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon
Articles on Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon
- Gemini 4 Carbon: Benchmarks, Price and Who Gets It FirstOctober 29, 2026
- Gemini 4 Pro Leaks: What's Verified and What's HypeOctober 1, 2026
- GDPval-AA Chart Fact-Check: Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra on CostSeptember 24, 2026
- GPT-6 Sol vs Claude Opus 5.5, Plus Luna: Best Value per TaskSeptember 24, 2026
- Claude Opus 5.5 Benchmarks: What the Chart Shows and HidesSeptember 23, 2026
- Claude Opus 5.5: Tops the Independent Index at a Lower PriceSeptember 23, 2026
Related comparisons
- Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- Gemini 4 Argon vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Gemini 4 Carbon vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Gemini 4 Carbon vs GPT-6 Astra
Production evaluation
Choosing between Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 4 Carbon?
Public benchmarks narrow the shortlist. We run both on your own tasks, data and cost limits, then build the routing and review controls to run the winner in production.
- A head-to-head evaluation on your real workload
- Routing between models by cost and difficulty
