Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $2 | $1.25 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $10 | $10 |
Verdict. Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.
Pricing. Both models sit in the mid-tier bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) is strongest on Coding Index (66.4), Intelligence Index (42.6). Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) leads on Intelligence Index (22.7).
Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.
Provider. Anthropic and Google sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Anthropic tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Google often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) costs $210.00 ($2520/year); Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) costs $187.50 ($2250/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) ≈ $30.00/run, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) ≈ $26.25/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) ≈ $1400/run, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) ≈ $1250/run. Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $3.44/M tokens vs $4.00/M for Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort).
Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) generates tokens faster at 58 tok/s vs — tok/s. Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) also has lower time-to-first-token (1.44s vs —s).
Choose based on your priorities: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview (May' 25) for lower cost, Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) for stronger benchmark performance, and Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.