Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Gemma 2 27B

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 9.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 Anthropic

44.1

Rank #81 Confirmed

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 2 27B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 48.4 to 19.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 77.8% for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B.
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 8K.
  • Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index44.129.4
Released2025-09-292024-06-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K8K
Max output64K2K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.65
Output $ / M tokens$15$0.65
Results tracked7334

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.3 (#61), Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Coding14891211
SWE-bench Verified71.3%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)71.4%—
LMArena WebDev1393—
SWE-bench Multilingual67%—
SciCode44.7%—
GSO14.7%—
WeirdML47.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—42.8%
LiveBench Coding—36%
BigCodeBench Complete—52.5%
ALE-Bench796.15—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.3 (#32), Gemma 2 27B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
Terminal-Bench46.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard73.2%—
GDPval42.5%—
Remote Labor Index2.1%—
τ²-bench Airline72%—
τ²-bench Banking25.3%—
τ²-bench Retail72.4%—
τ²-bench Telecom84.9%—
Cybench60%—
DeepResearch Bench52.6%—
OSWorld62.9%—
LMArena Search1159—
METR Time Horizons67.4%—
Vending-Bench 23,839—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#125), Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts14621198
DTBench83.2%48%
LMCA38.8%7.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index146.84122.08
ARC-AGI-213.6%—
SimpleBench54.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)37.3%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
CritPt1.1%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval6%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning—28.1%
Mystery Game Puzzles17%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—47.9%
ForecastBench61.9—
LiveBench—38.2%

Math Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 32.3 (#216), Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%1.4%
LMArena Math14491212
MATH Level 597.7%27.9%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)23.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
ProofBench19%—
Omni-MATH55.3%—
LiveBench Math—26.5%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)15.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#76), Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
GPQA Diamond82.3%36.5%
LMArena Expert14821172
Humanity's Last Exam13.7%—
SimpleQA Verified30.7%—
MMLU-Pro86.9%—
Confabulations—27.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
GPQA (HELM)68.6%—
MMLU—75.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.8 (#89), Gemma 2 27B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
VPCT39.8%—
LMArena Document1450—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.4 (#69), Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Non-English14251217
LMArena Chinese14591221
LMArena French14581247
LMArena German14271209
LMArena Japanese13901175
LMArena Korean14031174
LMArena Russian14371234
LMArena Spanish14571228

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.0 (#78), Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Instruction Following14591206
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.1%
IFEval85%—

Long Context Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#46), Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Longer Query14761231

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.5 (#34), Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Text14391231
LMArena Creative Writing14421241
LMArena Multi-Turn14651224
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1678—
WildBench85.4%—
LiveBench Language—32.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than Gemma 2 27B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 9.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Gemma 2 27B?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.3 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Gemma 2 27B share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper