Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
Which one, when
claude-opus-5-5 costs about 5.3x more per token on both input ($4 vs $0.75) and output ($20 vs $3.75), and in exchange gives you always-on thinking that cannot be disabled plus a 128000-token max output, so pick it for text-and-image reasoning jobs whose answers need room to run. gemini-3.7-flash accepts audio and video as well as text and images, holds a slightly larger 1048576-token context, and reads cache at $0.075 per million against $0.2, making it the pick for high-volume multimodal traffic where a 65536-token ceiling on output is enough.
Benchmarks
Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic DeepSeek Google Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
Pricing
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 3.7 Flash | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $4 | $0.75 | 5.3× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $20 | $3.75 | 5.3× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.2 | $0.075 | 2.7× |
| Cache write | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | - | - |
Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.
Where they sit - input price per 1M tokens across all 74 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)
Capabilities
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool use | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | always on | yes - vendor dial not published |
| Structured output | yes | yes |
| Prompt caching | explicit (you mark the prefix) | implicit + explicit |
| Cache lifetime | 5m default, 1h option | not published |
| Minimum cached prefix | 1024 tokens | 4096 tokens |
Specs
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Gemini 3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text image | text image audio video |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2026-08-13 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-06 | 2026-03 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Thinking parameter | output_config.effort | - |
| Accepted values | output_config.effort
| - |
| Default | medium | - |
Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: Claude Opus 5.5 · Gemini 3.7 Flash
One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway
Claude Opus 5.5 passed · 3 sentences
When we turned on reasoning, the model began "thinking out loud" before each answer, generating thousands of internal working tokens that users never see but that we are billed for just like the final response. Those hidden tokens are charged at the output rate, typically the most expensive rate, so the same question with the same visible answer now costs roughly twice as much or more. We can bring the bill back down without losing the quality gains by capping the reasoning budget and reserving reasoning mode for the complex tasks that actually benefit from it.
out 263 tok (+102 thinking) latency 5.7 s
Gemini 3.7 Flash passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a high volume of invisible "thinking tokens" behind the scenes to deliberate and solve complex logic before delivering a final response. Because our vendor bills strictly on token volume, this additional internal computation effectively doubled our billable output per query. In short, our costs increased because we are now paying for the extra compute capacity required to produce significantly higher-accuracy answers.
out 878 tok (+799 thinking) latency 6.9 s
Instruction following (exactly three sentences - countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.
Claude Opus 5.5 passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **Explanation:** The original code counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *items in a run*. Both `cur` and `best` started at 0, and `cur` reset to 0 on a mismatch, so a run of length *n* was reported as *n − 1*. For a single-element list the loop never executes, so it returned 0 instead of 1. For `[5, 5]` it returned 1 instead of 2. The fix treats every element as the start of a run of length 1: `best` and `cur` start at 1, and `cur` resets to 1 (not 0) when the value changes. An explicit check returns 0 for an empty list. The "misses runs at the last index" reports are the same off-by-one bug rather than a separate one. […]
out 723 tok (+303 thinking) latency 10.4 s
Gemini 3.7 Flash passed · 8/8 cases
Here is the corrected function: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function tracked equal adjacent transitions instead of the actual number of elements in a run, causing all non-empty run lengths to be undercounted by one (e.g., returning `0` instead of `1` for single-element lists because the loop never executes, and `1` instead of `2` for pairs). Initializing both `best` and `cur` to `1` (after handling empty inputs) and resetting `cur` to `1` on a mismatch ensures every individual element is counted as a valid run of at least length one.
out 1050 tok (+827 thinking) latency 6.4 s
Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.
Claude Opus 5.5 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` **Judgment calls to check:** - **quarter**: Kept as "September quarter" rather than "Q3", since the fiscal calendar isn't stated. The text mentions an upcoming "Q4 close," so it may be fiscal Q3, but that's not certain. - **revenue_usd_m**: The text says only "412 for the topline." It doesn't state currency or units, and the figure is on a constant-currency basis, not reported USD. USD millions is an assumption. Use `null` if you need strictly stated values. - **growth_pct**: The source says "eleven and change," so the true figure is slightly above 11. 11 is an approximation. - **guidance**: Guidance was explicitly withheld. I recorded that rather than `null`, since the text addresses it directly.
out 829 tok (+488 thinking) latency 10.9 s
Gemini 3.7 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": "withheld" } ```
out 918 tok (+858 thinking) latency 6.2 s
Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.
Claude Opus 5.5 passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Caching for our API gateway. Why pay twice for the same context? Our gateway now stores repeated prompt prefixes, system instructions, and document chunks, then reuses them whether your request goes to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or an open-source model. Teams running retrieval pipelines or long agent loops can cut token costs by up to 60 percent and trim latency on every cached call. Setup takes one configuration flag; no code changes are required. Cache rules respect tenant boundaries, expire on your schedule, and log every hit for audit review. Dashboards show savings by provider, route, and application in real time. Cross-Provider Prompt Caching is available on all Pro and Enterprise plans. Turn it on today.
out 1263 tok (+1007 thinking) latency 13.5 s
Gemini 3.7 Flash passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Why pay twice for identical AI queries simply because you routed them to different model vendors? Today, we introduce Universal Prompt Caching directly within our unified API gateway architecture. This capability stores repeated prompt contexts across OpenAI, Anthropic, and local models, instantly returning stored results to eliminate redundant computation fees. When your application sends an LLM request, the gateway inspects the payload, identifies semantic matches, and returns accurate cached responses in under ten milliseconds. Engineering teams can now slash inference latency by eighty percent while dramatically reducing monthly token expenditures across diverse production deployments. You retain complete privacy control, flexible cache eviction policies, and granular metrics through a single dashboard. Update your routing settings today to accelerate overall system performance.
out 2858 tok (+2718 thinking) latency 14.1 s
Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.
Switch between them with one line
Both ids are in every tab below - the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="claude-opus-5-5",
# model="gemini-3.7-flash", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "claude-opus-5-5",
// model: "gemini-3.7-flash", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "claude-opus-5-5",
# "model": "gemini-3.7-flash", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "claude-opus-5-5",
// Model: "gemini-3.7-flash", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("claude-opus-5-5")
// .model("gemini-3.7-flash") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 3.7 Flash?
Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.75 vs $4, 5.3× apart). Other rows may point the other way - the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.
Can I A/B test Claude Opus 5.5 against Gemini 3.7 Flash without two integrations?
Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key - switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.
Do Claude Opus 5.5 and Gemini 3.7 Flash support prompt caching?
Yes - both bill cached reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.