Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Cuál usar y cuándo — veredicto seleccionado, no una tabla de benchmarks
Elige Gemini 3.1 Pro cuando la carga de trabajo sea de documentos largos y multimodal: lee texto, imagen, audio y video a $2/$12 frente a los $5/$25 de Opus 5. Elige Claude Opus 5 para programación de agentes profunda y uso de herramientas a largo plazo, y ten en cuenta que su tokenizador factura el mismo texto como más tokens que la generación Sonnet 4.6 — compara la cantidad de tokens, no los precios de lista.
Precios
| Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entrada / 1M tokens | $5 | $2 | 2.5× |
| Salida / 1M tokens | $25 | $12 | 2.1× |
| Lectura de caché / 1M tokens | $0.5 | $0.2 | 2.5× |
| Escritura en caché | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | — | — |
Tarifas del catálogo en vivo en el momento de la compilación; la página de cada modelo incluye la ficha actualizada.
Dónde se sitúan — precio de entrada por 1M de tokens en todos los 63 modelos de chat en esta unidad de facturación (escala logarítmica)
Capacidades
| Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Uso de herramientas | sí | sí |
| Control de pensamiento | configurable | siempre activo |
| Salida estructurada | sí | sí |
| Caché de prompt | explícito (marcas el prefijo) | implícito + explícito |
| Tiempo de vida de la caché | 5m default, 1h option | no publicado |
| Prefijo mínimo en caché | 1024 tokens | 4096 tokens |
Especificaciones
| Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.1 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Modalidades de entrada | texto imagen | texto imagen audio vídeo |
| Modalidades de salida | texto | texto |
| Lanzamiento | 2026-07-24 | 2026-02-19 |
| Límite de conocimiento | 2026-05 | 2025-01 |
| Ventana de contexto | 1M | 1M |
| Salida máxima | 128K | 66K |
| Parámetro de pensamiento |
| thinkingLevel |
| Valores aceptados | thinking.type
effort
|
|
| Predeterminado | thinking on effort
| high |
Las especificaciones se transcriben de la documentación de cada proveedor; si un proveedor no publica una fila, se omite en lugar de inferirse. Fuentes completas: Claude Opus 5 · Gemini 3.1 Pro
Un prompt, ambos modelos — medido a través del gateway
Claude Opus 5 superado · 3 sentences
When reasoning is enabled, the model generates a hidden chain of "thinking" tokens before it writes the visible answer, and those internal tokens are billed at the output rate even though no one ever sees them — commonly 3–10x more tokens than the response itself. Because output tokens are priced several times higher than input tokens, that added volume hits us at our most expensive rate, which is why the bill roughly doubled while our request count stayed flat. The spend is controllable: we can cap the reasoning budget per call, route only genuinely hard requests to reasoning mode and cheaper models for the rest, and track cost per successfully completed task rather than cost per token, since a single correct answer usually beats three cheap retries plus human cleanup.
salida 529 tok latencia 9.0 s
Gemini 3.1 Pro superado · 3 sentences
Enabling the AI's reasoning capability forces the model to generate a massive amount of invisible "thought" tokens to logically work through complex problems before delivering its final answer. Because our vendor's pricing model charges us for total computational effort—including all of these hidden background tokens—our billable usage effectively doubled per request. While this directly increases our upfront software expenses, we are trading this higher compute cost for a drastic reduction in expensive downstream errors and manual human rework.
salida 1412 tok (+1318 pensamiento) latencia 12.7 s
Seguimiento de la instrucción (exactamente tres frases — contables), adaptación a la audiencia (registro de CFO), y la brecha de facturación por pensamiento oculto que los medidores de tokens de abajo dejan ver.
Claude Opus 5 superado · 8/8 cases
## Fixed version ```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 if cur > best: best = cur return best ``` ## The bug The counters were tracking the wrong quantity: `cur` counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *elements in the current run*, and both counters started at `0` instead of `1`. Since a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* adjacent equal pairs, every result came back one too small — `[1, 1]` returned 1, `[3, 3, 3]` returned 2 — and a single-element list returned 0 because the loop body never executed and `best` kept its initial value of `0`. […]
salida 1094 tok latencia 16.1 s
Gemini 3.1 Pro superado · 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 function initializes `cur` and `best` to 0 and only increments `cur` when two adjacent elements are equal. This effectively counts the number of *matching consecutive pairs* (or transitions) rather than the actual number of *elements* in the run, causing all calculated lengths to be […]
salida 4092 tok (+3933 pensamiento) latencia 31.1 s
Si el arreglo es realmente correcto (ejecutable), la densidad de la explicación, y la eficiencia en tokens sobre una tarea acotada.
Claude Opus 5 superado · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: - **quarter**: "September quarter" is labeled Q3 because the text refers to an upcoming "Q4 close," implying a calendar-aligned fiscal year. No fiscal year is given. - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is stated as constant-currency and hedged ("call it"), so it's approximate; the currency is not explicitly stated as USD. - **growth_pct**: "up eleven and change" means slightly more than 11, so 11 is a floor rather than an exact figure.
salida 539 tok latencia 7.6 s
Gemini 3.1 Pro superado · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": "11 and change", "guidance": "withheld" } ```
salida 1806 tok (+1743 pensamiento) latencia 14.1 s
Obediencia al esquema (sin campos inventados), presión de alucinación (guidance se retiene explícitamente), y diferencias en la ruta de salida estructurada.
Claude Opus 5 superado · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** We're introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching in the API Gateway. Repeated system prompts, long documents, and few-shot examples are stored once at the gateway layer and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Instead of paying full input token costs on every request, your application sends a cache reference, and the gateway rehydrates the context before forwarding it downstream. Why does that matter? Teams running high-volume agents and retrieval pipelines typically see input token spend fall 40 to 70 percent, with median latency dropping by several hundred milliseconds. Caches are scoped per project, encrypted at rest, and invalidated automatically when a prompt template changes. Enable it with a single header, and see the docs for TTL tuning and per-route controls.
salida 1593 tok latencia 19.1 s
Gemini 3.1 Pro superado · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
We are excited to announce universal prompt caching for our API gateway. Handling multiple AI models usually means paying for redundant prompts across various platforms. Why should you pay twice for identical queries? Now, our gateway automatically stores and retrieves exact prompt matches regardless of the backend provider you select. This reduces latency and significantly cuts your inference costs. Whether you route a request to one service today or a different vendor tomorrow, our intelligent caching layer intercepts the call and serves the saved response instantly. Developers can configure cache expiration times and specify matching criteria directly in the control panel. Experience faster response times and optimized resource usage starting today. Upgrade your software client to version two right now.
salida 4060 tok (+3929 pensamiento) latencia 28.6 s
Obediencia a las restricciones (presupuesto de palabras, lista de palabras prohibidas, la única pregunta), huella de estilo, y control de la longitud.
Cambia entre ellos con una línea
Ambos IDs están en cada pestaña a continuación — el par de líneas resaltadas es la única edición. Mismo endpoint, misma clave, misma estructura de solicitud.
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",
# model="gemini-3.1-pro-preview", # descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
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",
// model: "gemini-3.1-pro-preview", // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
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",
# "model": "gemini-3.1-pro-preview", # descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
"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",
// Model: "gemini-3.1-pro-preview", // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
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")
// .model("gemini-3.1-pro-preview") // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));Preguntas frecuentes
¿Cuál es más barato, Claude Opus 5 o Gemini 3.1 Pro?
Gemini 3.1 Pro es más barato en entrada / 1m tokens ($2 vs $5, con una diferencia de 2.5×). Otras filas pueden indicar lo contrario — la tabla anterior muestra la ficha completa, y el costo real depende de su combinación.
¿Puedo hacer pruebas A/B de Claude Opus 5 frente a Gemini 3.1 Pro sin dos integraciones?
Sí. Ambos se sirven a través del mismo endpoint compatible con OpenAI con una clave API — el cambio es una modificación de una línea en la cadena del modelo, por lo que puede enrutar una fracción del tráfico a cada uno y comparar las facturas directamente.
¿Admiten Claude Opus 5 y Gemini 3.1 Pro caché de prompts?
Sí — ambos cobran las lecturas en caché por debajo de su tarifa de entrada, por lo que las cargas de trabajo con prefijo caliente cuestan menos de lo que sugieren las tarifas de lista. Las filas exactas de lectura en caché están en la tabla de precios de arriba.