Model comparison

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemma 3 27B

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Haiku 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic

39.5

Rank #165 Confirmed

Gemma 3 27B Google

30.8

Rank #284 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 3 27B in 2 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Haiku 4.5 leads 44.0 to 22.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 66.7% for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B.
  • Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $5 for Claude Haiku 4.5.
  • Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemma 3 27B specifications
Claude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index39.530.8
Released2025-10-152025-03-11
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output64K8K
Input $ / M tokens$1$0.08
Output $ / M tokens$5$0.16
Results tracked5343

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Haiku 4.5 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 44.0 (#78), Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
SciCode43.3%21.2%
LMArena Coding14531322
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)66.6%—
Aider Polyglot—4.9%
LMArena WebDev1330—
SWE-bench Multilingual64.7%—
WeirdML45.4%—
LiveBench Coding—39.9%
ALE-Bench653.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Haiku 4.5 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 33.6 (#52), Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard68.7%29.5%
Terminal-Bench35.5%—
DeepResearch Bench45.5%—
BALROG31.2%—
ExploitBench13.7%—
Vending-Bench 2458.89—

Reasoning Gemma 3 27B leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 15.1 (#320), Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
CritPt0%0%
Chess Puzzles8%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14201340
DTBench73.6%52.5%
LMCA30.9%12.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index142.41130.04
ARC-AGI-24%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—40.4%
NYT Connections (extended)14.3%—
ARC-AGI-147.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning—43.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—51.5%
ForecastBench61.4—
LiveBench—50%

Math Claude Haiku 4.5 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 44.9 (#78), Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202566.7%22.5%
LMArena Math13961312
MATH Level 596.4%74%
Omni-MATH56.1%—
LiveBench Math—55.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Claude Haiku 4.5 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 37.7 (#153), Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
GPQA Diamond71.2%47.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.8%7.4%
LMArena Expert14421304
SimpleQA Verified13.2%—
MMLU-Pro77.7%—
Confabulations—40.3%
GPQA (HELM)60.5%—

Multimodal Gemma 3 27B leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 26.8 (#118), Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Vision—1164
GeoBench—52%
Blueprint-Bench 20%—
LMArena Document1420—

Multilingual Claude Haiku 4.5 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 49.9 (#129), Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Non-English13771334
LMArena Chinese14171346
LMArena French14081368
LMArena German13751362
LMArena Japanese13391287
LMArena Korean13471308
LMArena Russian13811349
LMArena Spanish14201349

Instruction Following Too close to call

Claude Haiku 4.5: 71.4 (#149), Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Instruction Following14141321
LiveBench Instruction Following—74.9%
IFEval80.1%—

Long Context Claude Haiku 4.5 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 43.6 (#92), Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Longer Query14271333
Fiction.LiveBench—33.3%

Writing & Preference Claude Haiku 4.5 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 57.9 (#123), Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text13961358
LMArena Creative Writing13721346
LMArena Multi-Turn14091345
Short-Story Creative Writing—79.9%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1266
WildBench83.9%—
EQ-Bench 41064—
LiveBench Language—34.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Haiku 4.5 better than Gemma 3 27B?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Haiku 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemma 3 27B?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Claude Haiku 4.5 lists at $1 and $5.

Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemma 3 27B better for coding?

Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemma 3 27B share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Haiku 4.5 has 53 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3 27B has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper