Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M) vs Google Gemini 3.6 Flash (1M)

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, context window, capabilities, and a real-cost sample workload.

Option A

Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M)

by Anthropic
Context:1M
Input:$3.00 / 1M
Output:$15.00 / 1M
Released:2026-07
Option B

Google Gemini 3.6 Flash (1M)

by Google
Context:1M
Input:$0.50 / 1M
Output:$3.00 / 1M
Released:2026-07

Detailed Comparison

DimensionAnthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M)Google Gemini 3.6 Flash (1M)
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Context window TieTie1M1M
Input price ($/1M) Winner$3.00$0.50
Output price ($/1M) Winner$15.00$3.00
Sample workload cost Winner
1M input + 500K output tokens
$10.50 $2.00
Released TieTie2026-072026-07
Tokenizerclaude-4gemini

The verdict

On the dimensions we measured, Google Gemini 3.6 Flash (1M) wins more often - particularly on cost-effectiveness for a typical 1M+0.5M workload.

Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M) - Key features

The workhorse of the Claude 5 family. Sonnet 5 lands close to Opus 4.8 on coding and agentic benchmarks while staying at the long-standing Sonnet price, with a 1M token context window available by default.

  • 1M token context window
  • Near-Opus coding quality
  • Fast time to first token
  • Strong tool use and structured output
  • Batch and caching discounts

Google Gemini 3.6 Flash (1M) - Key features

The fast, cheap tier of Gemini 3.6. Flash keeps a 1M token window and multimodal input while running several times faster than Pro, which makes it the default choice for high-volume production traffic.

  • 1M token context window
  • Very high throughput
  • Multimodal input (text, image, audio, video)
  • Context caching
  • Thinking budget control

How to choose

Estimate the real cost of either model for your prompts using our Token Calculator.