Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AnthropicGoogle

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 is the more secure of the two: Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 scores 4.4% and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking scores 21.5% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

Head-to-Head Overview

Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 vs Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.

Overall (ASR)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2
4.4%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
21.5%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2
8.8%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
100.0%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2
3.8%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
100.0%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2
0.5%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
100.0%

Key Highlights

  • Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
  • Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
  • Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking
Full security profile
Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2
Full security profile
Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Frequently asked questions

Is Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 or Google Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 is the more secure of the two: Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 scores 4.4% and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking scores 21.5% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 has a 4.4% ASR and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking has a 21.5% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Claude 3.5 Sonnet v2 and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons