Model comparison
Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemma 3 27B
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Haiku 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher in 5 categories and Gemma 3 27B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Haiku 5.5 leads 73.6 to 25.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.9% for Claude Haiku 5.5 and 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.50 for Claude Haiku 5.5.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 49.5 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2026-10-07 | 2025-03-11 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.08 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.16 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 43 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 49.2 (#50), Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 4.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1587 | — |
| SciCode | — | 21.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 39.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1322 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: —, Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 29.5% |
Reasoning Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 35.2 (#69), Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 40.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 65.7% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 43.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1340 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 30% | — |
| DTBench | — | 52.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 51.5% |
| LMCA | — | 12.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 130.04 |
| LiveBench | — | 50% |
Math Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 73.6 (#18), Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 22.5% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 75.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46.3% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 55.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1312 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 74% |
Knowledge Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 50.8 (#70), Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.6% | 47.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 40.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1304 |
Multimodal Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 43.7 (#21), Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
| GeoBench | — | 52% |
| Furniture Assembly | 47.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: —, Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1334 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1346 |
| LMArena French | — | 1368 |
| LMArena German | — | 1362 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1308 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1349 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1349 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: —, Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 74.9% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1321 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: —, Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 33.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1333 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: —, Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1358 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1346 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 79.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1266 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1345 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 34.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Gemma 3 27B?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Haiku 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 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 5.5 lists at $0.10 and $0.50.
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemma 3 27B better for coding?
Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.2 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Haiku 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemma 3 27B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Haiku 5.5 has 9 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3 27B has 43.