+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Gemma 3 27B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemma 3 27B leads with 5.6% higher average benchmark score. Claude 3.5 Haiku offers 137.9K more tokens in context window than Gemma 3 27B. Gemma 3 27B is $4.50 cheaper per million tokens. Gemma 3 27B supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Gemma 3 27B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku was developed as the next generation of Anthropic's fastest model, offering similar speed to Claude 3 Haiku while surpassing Claude 3 Opus on many intelligence benchmarks. Built with low latency, improved instruction following, and accurate tool use, it serves user-facing products, specialized sub-agent tasks, and data-heavy applications.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B represents the largest variant in the Gemma 3 family, developed to provide flagship-level open-source capabilities. Built with advanced training methodologies and 27 billion parameters, it offers researchers and developers access to powerful language understanding without proprietary restrictions.
4 months newer
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Anthropic
2024-10-22
Gemma 3 27B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input:$0.80
Output:$4.00
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.20($4.50 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 4 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Average Score:66.0%
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Average Score:71.7%(+5.6%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.3ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 104 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Avg Score:66.0%
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Avg Score:71.7%(+5.6%)
Providers:2