Model Comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Claude 3.5 Haiku

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

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

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Apr 20 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
Mon Apr 20 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
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).

Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Mon Apr 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

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

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

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

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

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

Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

1.8 years ago

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

3mo newer

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

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

Detailed Comparison

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

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 27B vs Claude 3.5 Haiku

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