Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Gemma 3 27B

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 100× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

Gemma 3 27B Google

30.8

Rank #284 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 9 categories and Gemma 3 27B in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 54.8 to 22.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 86.1% for Claude Opus 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 $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Claude Opus 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 Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index50.530.8
Released2025-11-012025-03-11
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output64K8K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.08
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.16
Results tracked6943

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Coding15041322
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
Aider Polyglot—4.9%
LMArena WebDev1494—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
SciCode—21.2%
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
LiveBench Coding—39.9%
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%29.5%
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%40.4%
Chess Puzzles12%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14761340
DTBench89.9%52.5%
LMCA44.5%12.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09130.04
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
SimpleBench62%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
CritPt—0%
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
LiveBench Reasoning—43.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—51.5%
ForecastBench60.7—
LiveBench—50%

Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%22.5%
LMArena Math14631312
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
ProofBench36%—
LiveBench Math—55.4%
MATH Level 5—74%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
GPQA Diamond86%47.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%7.4%
LMArena Expert14871304
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Confabulations—40.3%

Multimodal Gemma 3 27B leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
GeoBench75%52%
LMArena Vision—1164
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Non-English14381334
LMArena Chinese14701346
LMArena French14711368
LMArena German14491362
LMArena Japanese14161287
LMArena Korean14241308
LMArena Russian14471349
LMArena Spanish14581349

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Instruction Following14781321
LiveBench Instruction Following—74.9%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Longer Query14801333
Fiction.LiveBench—33.3%
CL-bench21.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text14511358
LMArena Creative Writing14451346
EQ-Bench Creative Writing16871266
LMArena Multi-Turn14661345
Short-Story Creative Writing—79.9%
LiveBench Language—34.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Gemma 3 27B?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 100× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 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 Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

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

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

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

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3 27B has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper