Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Gemma 2 27B

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 2 benchmarks (HumanEval, MATH), while Gemma 2 27B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Apr 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Apr 10 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Apr 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while Gemma 2 27B uses Gemma.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27.

Claude 3.5 Haiku is 4 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

3mo newer
Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

1.8 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher HumanEval score (88.1% vs 51.8%)
Higher MATH score (69.4% vs 42.3%)
Google
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Google
Gemma 2 27B

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Gemma 2 27B

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Haiku is made by Anthropic and Gemma 2 27B is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%.
Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and Gemma 2 27B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and Gemma 2 27B is developed by Google.