Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental
Compare Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet by Anthropic against Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental by Google AI, in 402 community votes, claude 3.7 thinking sonnet wins 55% of head-to-head duels, context windows of 200K vs 1.0M, tested across 43 shared challenges.
Web Design: Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet wins 62% of votes
Image Generation: Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet wins 55% of votes
Reasoning: Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental wins 68% of votes
Conversation: Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental wins 67% of votes
Analysis: Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet and Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental are tied
Our Verdict
Claude 3.7 Thinking SonnetWinner
Gemini 2.5 Pro ExperimentalRunner-up
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet has the edge overall. In 402 blind votes, Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet wins 55% of the time.
Pick Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet for Web Design, Image Generation. Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental for Reasoning, Conversation. Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental is 15x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Slight edge
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet
Input
$6.00
Output
$30.00
Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental
Input
$1.00
6.0× cheaper
Output
$2.00
15× cheaper
Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental is cheaper on both — 6.0× input, 15× output
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
34%
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet uses 4.6x more headings
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet
Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental
61%Vocabulary54%
49wSentence Length15w
0.64Hedging0.35
2.2Bold5.6
4.5Lists3.9
0.00Emoji0.00
1.81Headings0.39
0.21Transitions0.17
Based on 21 + 18 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
