Model Comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
vs. Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Anthropic, Google
Recommended Pick
Go Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning) 4 metric wins Strongest on: Input price, Output price, Intelligence
Lowest Price
Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
30.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
26.0 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24).
Reasoning gap
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) leads Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning) by 9.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) leads Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning) by 17.0 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning) wins 4 measurable categories, including Input price, Output price, Intelligence, HLE.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) | Top Pick Go Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $3.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $15.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $6.00/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | |
| Release Date | Jun 21, 2024 | Apr 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | — |
| TTFT | — | — |
| Latency | — | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 30.6 | 21.1 |
| Intelligence | 14.2 | 15.2 |
| Coding | 26.0 | 9.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 56.0% | 43.3% |
| MMLU Pro | 75.1% | — |
| HLE | 3.7% | 4.8% |
| MATH 500 | 69.5% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 9.7% | — |
| SciCode | 31.6% | 20.9% |
| LCR | — | 15.0% |
| IFBench | — | 38.0% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 20.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 3.0% |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 30.6 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) reaches a 26.0 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Gemma 4 E2B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
