Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemma 2 27B

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 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's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #145 Confirmed

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher in 7 categories and Gemma 2 27B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 4 leads 43.3 to 10.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 71.1% for Claude Sonnet 4 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.
  • Claude Sonnet 4 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 and Gemma 2 27B specifications
Claude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index40.829.4
Released2025-05-222024-06-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K8K
Max output64K2K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.65
Output $ / M tokens$15$0.65
Results tracked5834

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.5 (#88), Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Coding14141211
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)64.9%—
Aider Polyglot61.3%—
SciCode40%—
GSO4.9%—
WeirdML46.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—42.8%
LiveBench Coding—36%
BigCodeBench Complete—52.5%
ALE-Bench655.35—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 38.5 (#31), Gemma 2 27B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
TheAgentCompany33.1%—
Cybench35%—
DeepResearch Bench46.6%—
OSWorld43.9%—
METR Time Horizons62%—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 22.9 (#187), Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts13721198
DTBench77.1%48%
LMCA29%7.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index141.69122.08
ARC-AGI-25.9%—
SimpleBench45.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73%—
ARC-AGI-140%—
CritPt0.3%—
EnigmaEval3.1%—
LiveBench Reasoning—28.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—47.9%
ForecastBench60.2—
LiveBench—38.2%

Math Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.3 (#80), Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202571.1%1.4%
LMArena Math13751212
MATH Level 584.4%27.9%
Omni-MATH60.2%—
LiveBench Math—26.5%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 41.8 (#108), Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
GPQA Diamond79.2%36.5%
Confabulations13.2%27.1%
LMArena Expert13721172
Humanity's Last Exam7.8%—
MMLU-Pro84.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.3%—
GPQA (HELM)70.6%—
MMLU—75.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 26.2 (#121), Gemma 2 27B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Vision1191—
GeoBench37%—
VPCT34%—
MindCube44.8%—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 46.7 (#156), Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Non-English13331217
LMArena Chinese13501221
LMArena French13631247
LMArena German13311209
LMArena Japanese13021175
LMArena Korean12911174
LMArena Russian13551234
LMArena Spanish13571228

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 71.7 (#145), Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Instruction Following13761206
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.1%
IFEval84%—

Long Context Gemma 2 27B leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 33.7 (#259), Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Longer Query13981231
Fiction.LiveBench46.9%—

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 57.1 (#132), Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Gemma 2 27B
LMArena Text13511231
LMArena Creative Writing13451241
LMArena Multi-Turn13761224
Short-Story Creative Writing81.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1483—
WildBench83.8%—
LiveBench Language—32.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4 better than Gemma 2 27B?

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 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's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4 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 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4 or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4 does, with 200K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4 and Gemma 2 27B share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4 has 58 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper