Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemma 2 27B

Gemma 2 27B costs 38.5x less per output token than Claude Opus 4.8 ($0.65 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 34 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic
Coding
65.0
Overall
69.8
Output $/M
$25.00
34
Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
0
vs boards won of 34 shared

Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemma 2 27B: which to pick

Only Claude Opus 4.8 has a coding score, 65.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 2 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 2 27B for output tokens 38.5x cheaper ($0.65 vs $25.00 per million).

Shared results
34
Claude Opus 4.8 only
96
Gemma 2 27B only
2
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.8 65.0 from 6 benchmarks, Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 62.9 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: Claude Opus 4.8 98.3% against Gemma 2 27B 1.4%, 96.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.8 $25.00 against Gemma 2 27B $0.65 per million output tokens, 38.5x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.8 takes 1M tokens, Gemma 2 27B 8K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.8BarsGemma 2 27BTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning40
Math30
Knowledge50
General190
All shared boards340
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
LiveBench coding77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena WebDev1556Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
AA Coding Index74.3Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)87.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)88.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)23.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)82.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)47.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)1.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)71.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)59.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SciCode54.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)58.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
FrontierCode46.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
GSO-Bench47.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
WeirdML82.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: coding14901211Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: software and IT14881228Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena WebDev: React1557Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1543Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SciCode12.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index41.8Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index159.0122.1Claude Opus 4.8
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index27 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
AA Agentic Index41.9Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1233Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1249Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1222Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1232Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1231Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1238Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1221Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1227Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1270Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench research81.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench browser96.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench long agentic48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)53.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)30.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)43.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)69.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)4.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)11.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom94.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
APEX-Agents48.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Remote Labor Index8.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
OSWorld 2.020.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
DeepResearch Bench50.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
PostTrainBench33.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,787Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Search1204Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond92.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench reasoning89.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)86.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)92.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)48.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)91.0%36.5%Claude Opus 4.8
ARC-AGI92.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
ARC-AGI-272.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SimpleBench64.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Chess puzzles52.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Mystery game puzzles36.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
EBR-bench28.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14821198Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: expert15031171Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14871206Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision: diagrams1315Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1337Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME98.3%1.4%Claude Opus 4.8
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 380.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
FrontierMath, tier 456.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
ProofBench69.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MATH level 5Not measured27.9%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: math14861212Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: mathematical work14971221Claude Opus 4.8
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
MMLU Pro89.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.6%68.0%Claude Opus 4.8
CorpFin (Vals AI)66.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)69.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)53.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SimpleQA Verified53.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MMLUNot measured75.7%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: science14771228Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14641198Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: legal and government14771241Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: business and finance14581208Claude Opus 4.8
FACTS Benchmark Suite53.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
Design Arena: websites1259Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: UI components1257Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: game dev1264Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: data viz1240Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: 3D1223Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1255Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: SVG1194Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1277Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench design78.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index190
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
LiveBench data analysis66.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)68.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)54.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)85.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Vals Multimodal Index70.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
IFBench62.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)77.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
DTBench94.9%48.0%Claude Opus 4.8
LMCA57.5%7.1%Claude Opus 4.8
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Furniture assembly42.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text14611231Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: instruction following14761206Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: creative writing14541240Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision1294Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: English14681242Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: non-English14501217Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Chinese15061221Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: German14721209Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Japanese14421175Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Korean14311174Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: French14811248Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Spanish14651228Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Russian14741234Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Polish14591277Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: multi-turn14761224Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: longer queries14831230Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: writing and language14611249Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14401212Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision: English1293Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1346Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1303Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1282Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1301Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Document1475Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Gemma 2 27BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.8$0.018Fits in one request
Gemma 2 27B$0.0010Fits in one request

Gemma 2 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.8$0.325Fits in one request
Gemma 2 27B$0.034Exceeds the context window

Gemma 2 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.8$1.25Fits in one request
Gemma 2 27B$0.137Exceeds the context window

Gemma 2 27B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemma 2 27B
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.8Google Gemma 2 27B
MakerAnthropicGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMay 27, 2026July 13, 2024
Context window1M8K
Input $/Mtok$5.00$0.65
Output $/Mtok$25.00$0.65
Coding index65.0Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it60
Cost per solved task$2.17Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Gemma 2 27B for coding?

Only Claude Opus 4.8 has a coding score, 65.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 2 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 2 27B for output tokens 38.5x cheaper ($0.65 vs $25.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemma 2 27B?

Claude Opus 4.8 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 and $0.65. Cost per solved task is known for Claude Opus 4.8 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.8 or Gemma 2 27B?

Claude Opus 4.8, with 1M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemma 2 27B comparison based on?

34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.8's coding index rests on 6 independent benchmarks and Gemma 2 27B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next