# Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemma 3n E4b IT

> Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 133× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-8-vs-gemma-3n-e4b-it
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 3n E4b IT in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.2 to 32.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 88.8% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 31.5% for Gemma 3n E4b IT.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.12 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
- Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 33K.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google |
| Noometry Index | 60.7 | 36.7 |
| Rank | 9 | 203 |
| Context | 1M | 33K |
| Input $/M | $5 | $0.06 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $0.12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.8: 60.2 (#9)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1491 | 1269 |
| DeepSWE | 59% | — |
| FrontierCode | 46.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1556 | — |
| SciCode | 53.5% | — |
| GSO | 47.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 82.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,564 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#10)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 48.9% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 20.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 8.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 50.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 33.8% | — |
| GBAEval | 70.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1204 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,787 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.8: 64.6 (#14)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 88.8% | 31.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1284 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 72.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 64.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | — |
| CritPt | 20.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 34% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 28.6% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 36% | — |
| DTBench | 94.9% | — |
| LMCA | 57.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 87.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.3 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.9 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.8: 78.2 (#11)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1487 | 1251 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 80% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 91.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 69% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 47.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#26)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1501 | 1245 |
| GPQA Diamond | 91% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 53% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.8: 43.2 (#20)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1295 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 14.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 42.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1475 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.8: 55.4 (#31)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1450 | 1285 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1509 | 1310 |
| LMArena French | 1482 | 1330 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1312 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1440 | 1274 |
| LMArena Korean | 1432 | 1259 |
| LMArena Russian | 1476 | 1288 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1470 | 1305 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.8: 77.6 (#22)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1255 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#37)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | 1277 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.8: 72.1 (#17)
- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1460 | 1306 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1287 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1476 | 1276 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1840 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1281 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Gemma 3n E4b IT?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 133× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemma 3n E4b IT?

Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.12 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

### Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemma 3n E4b IT better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 60.2 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 3n E4b IT share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18.