Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision: which model should you choose?
We compared Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision has the stronger average benchmark score; Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is a multimodal model from Anthropic. It offers a 200,000-token context window, costs $14.91 per million input tokens and $74.27 per million output tokens, and averages 81.6 across the index's benchmark suite.
- Input
- $14.91 / 1M
- Output
- $74.27 / 1M
- Context
- 200,000
- Avg score
- 81.6
- Open weights
- No
Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision
Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision is a multimodal model from Google DeepMind. It offers a 200,000-token context window, costs $14.91 per million input tokens and $71.00 per million output tokens, and averages 82.0 across the index's benchmark suite.
- Input
- $14.91 / 1M
- Output
- $71.00 / 1M
- Context
- 200,000
- Avg score
- 82.0
- Open weights
- No
Specification comparison
| Spec | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $14.91 | $14.91 | Tie |
| Output price / 1M | $74.27 | $71.00 | B |
| Context window | 200,000 | 200,000 | Tie |
| Max output | 128,000 | 4,096 | A |
| Average score | 81.6 | 82.0 | B |
| Arena Elo | 1451.9 | 1451.3 | A |
| Open weights | No | No | Tie |
Benchmark comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision wins 8, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision | Gap | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 83.5 | 83.9 | 0.4 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| GPQA Diamond | 80.2 | 78.0 | 2.2 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.1 | 72.4 | 2.3 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| HumanEval | 85.7 | 85.8 | 0.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| MATH-500 | 88.9 | 82.9 | 6.0 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
| AIME 2025 | 81.2 | 80.0 | 1.2 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
| LiveCodeBench | 75.0 | 76.0 | 1.0 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| IFEval | 88.5 | 90.2 | 1.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| TruthfulQA | 81.7 | 84.1 | 2.4 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| HellaSwag | 87.6 | 90.8 | 3.2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| MMMU | 75.5 | 78.2 | 2.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| Arena Elo | 1451.9 | 1451.3 | 0.6 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
Price analysis
On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs about $29.75 per million tokens and Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision costs about $28.93. Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision is roughly 3% cheaper than Claude 3.7 Sonnet. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.
Both models list a 200,000-token context window. That is enough for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.
Verdict
Across 12 shared benchmarks, Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision wins 8, and 0 are tied. On the index average, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision leads Claude 3.7 Sonnet by 0.4 points (82.0 versus 81.6).
The price picture favours Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision. The context picture is effectively a tie. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.
If you need a single default, start with Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.
Choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet if
- You need the larger 128,000-token output limit.
Choose Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision if
- You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
- Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
FAQ
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision?
On the index average, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision leads Claude 3.7 Sonnet by 0.4 points (82.0 versus 81.6). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins 4 benchmarks, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision wins 8.
Which is cheaper, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision?
Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $28.93 per million tokens, versus $29.75 for Claude 3.7 Sonnet.
Which has the larger context window?
Both models list a 200,000-token context window.
Are these models open weights?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is proprietary; Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision is proprietary.
Which should I choose for production?
If you need a single default, start with Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.