New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash

vs

Which one, when

Pick claude-opus-5-5 when you want its always-on thinking mode (it cannot be disabled) and long single-shot generations, since it will emit up to 128000 output tokens against gemini-3.8-flash's 65536; the cost is roughly 5.3x more per token on both input and output ($4 and $20 per million versus $0.75 and $3.75). Choose gemini-3.8-flash for high-volume text, image, audio and video input on a slightly larger 1048576-token window and cheaper cache reads at $0.075 versus $0.2 per million. Both are late-2026 releases with tools, code and reasoning, so the split is really modalities and price against output length.

Benchmarks

Above averageNo peer higherClaude Opus 5.59 / 97 / 9Gemini 3.8 Flash12 / 175 / 17
Claude Opus 5.5 Gemini 3.8 Flash other models measured peer average no peer scored higher
Terminal-bench 4.0
no peer scored higher 66.4%
19.1%
BioMysteryBench hard
N/A
no peer scored higher 56.5%
OSWorld 2.0 Partial score, batch tool enabled
N/A
59%
HealthBench Professional
N/A
52.1%
Finance Agent v2
N/A
no peer scored higher 61.4%
Legal Agent Benchmark
N/A
10%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
95.3%
AutomationBench
40%
N/A
CharXiv (RQ) no tools
N/A
no peer scored higher 86.2%

Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

Pricing

Claude Opus 5.5 Gemini 3.8 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 3.8 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 3.8 Flash
Input modalities text image text image audio video
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-09-22 2026-09-02
Knowledge cutoff 2026-06 2026-03
Context window 1M 1M
Max output 128K 66K
Thinking parameter output_config.effort -
Accepted values
output_config.effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
-
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 3.8 Flash

One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

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 3.8 Flash passed · 3 sentences

When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating hidden "thinking tokens" to work through logic step-by-step before producing a final answer. Because AI vendors bill for every single token processed—visible or not—this internal deliberation dramatically inflated our billable volume per query. In short, while our total number of user requests remained flat, the cost per transaction doubled to buy higher accuracy on complex tasks.

out 705 tok (+624 thinking) latency 6.4 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences - countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

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 3.8 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function counted equal-neighbor transitions rather than the actual items making up each run. Because `cur` started at `0` (and was reset to `0` on mismatches), every run was undercounted by one: single-element lists returned `0` because the loop never executed, and any subsequent run—including those ending at the last index—recorded a count of $N - 1$ instead of $N$. The fix handles empty input upfront, initializes both `cur` and `best` to `1` (since any single element forms a run of length 1), and resets `cur` to `1` whenever a new run begins.

out 1393 tok (+1149 thinking) latency 10.1 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

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 3.8 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null } ```

out 3989 tok (+3932 thinking) latency 30.4 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

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 3.8 Flash passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Why pay multiple model providers for the exact same output? Introducing Universal Prompt Cache, our latest API gateway capability engineered to cut compute expenses and drop inference latency. When your application makes a call, the gateway inspects a central memory layer before routing traffic to external LLMs. If an identical query was previously processed by OpenAI, Anthropic, or Mistral, our gateway returns that response immediately. This shared cache eliminates duplicate token fees and insulates your production apps from vendor rate limits or unexpected downtime. Developers can easily customize expiration settings, enforce strict data privacy controls, and configure invalidation logic across every endpoint. Stop wasting your budget on repeated queries. Enable prompt caching in your dashboard to accelerate your pipeline today.

out 3833 tok (+3688 thinking) latency 21.8 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-3.8-flash",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get your API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?

Gemini 3.8 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 3.8 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 3.8 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.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies