Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemma 3 27B
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated); Gemma 3 27B #164 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 5 and Gemma 3 27B share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 22 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 5; 2 to Gemma 3 27B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 22
- Gemma 3 27B only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Sonnet 5 and Gemma 3 27B is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Claude Sonnet 5 is priced at $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 3 27B. Claude Sonnet 5 has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 32K for Gemma 3 27B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Sonnet 5 | Δ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 581.9 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 3 27BNot measured |
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 576.7 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 3 27BNot measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 557.4 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 3 27BNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Sonnet 588.3 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 3 27BNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Gemma 3 27B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Gemma 3 27B$0 input / $0 output | Gemma 3 27B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Gemma 3 27B31 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Gemma 3 27B2.04 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 51M | Gemma 3 27B32K | Claude Sonnet 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Gemma 3 27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 81.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1607 | -144 | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 46.7% | 0.3% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 55.4% | 0.0% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1388 | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 39.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 44.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 80.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 10.5% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Gemma 3 27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 78.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | 28.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 42.7% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 61.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.5% | 10.1% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.6% | 21.2% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Gemma 3 27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 53.4% | 7.4% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | 42.8% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 39.6% | 4.7% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 15.3% | -65.9% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.3% | 12.5% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 37.3% | 89.5% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Gemma 3 27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 31.8% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Sonnet 5 and Gemma 3 27B on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Claude Sonnet 5 and Gemma 3 27B today?
Claude Sonnet 5: $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens Gemma 3 27B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.