Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemma 2 27B

Comparing Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemma 2 27B across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemma 2 27B don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Apr 17 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
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 Opus 4.6 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4.6 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Apr 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude Opus 4.6 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Gemma 2 27B does not.

Claude Opus 4.6 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 2 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.6 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 Opus 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27.

Claude Opus 4.6 is 20 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Claude Opus 4.6

Feb 5, 2026

2 months ago

1.6yr 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 (1,000,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Google
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Google
Gemma 2 27B

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemma 2 27B

Claude Opus 4.6 (Anthropic) and Gemma 2 27B (Google) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.
Claude Opus 4.6 scores Vending-Bench 2: 100.0%, AIME 2025: 99.8%, Tau2 Telecom: 99.3%, Graphwalks parents >128k: 95.4%, MRCR v2 (8-needle): 93.0%. Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%.
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1.0M 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 multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude Opus 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and Gemma 2 27B is developed by Google.