Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Claude 3 Opus
49
Winner · 2/8 categoriesGemma 4 E4B
~47
2/8 categoriesClaude 3 Opus· Gemma 4 E4B
Pick Claude 3 Opus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E4B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Claude 3 Opus has the cleaner overall profile here, landing at 49 versus 47. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Claude 3 Opus's sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 61 against 25.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is BBH, 74% to 33.1%. Gemma 4 E4B does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Gemma 4 E4B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 3 Opus is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude 3 Opus gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E4B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Gemma 4 E4B |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 44% | — |
| BrowseComp | 56% | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | 47% | — |
| CodingGemma 4 E4B wins | ||
| HumanEval | 84.9% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | 10% | — |
| LiveCodeBench | 20% | 52% |
| SWE-bench Pro | 20% | — |
| Multimodal & GroundedClaude 3 Opus wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 73% | 52.6% |
| OfficeQA Pro | 67% | — |
| ReasoningClaude 3 Opus wins | ||
| MuSR | 57% | — |
| BBH | 74% | 33.1% |
| LongBench v2 | 62% | — |
| MRCRv2 | 63% | 25.4% |
| KnowledgeGemma 4 E4B wins | ||
| MMLU | 86.8% | — |
| GPQA | 61% | 58.6% |
| SuperGPQA | 59% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 62% | 69.4% |
| HLE | 1% | — |
| FrontierScience | 56% | — |
| SimpleQA | 59% | — |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | 77% | — |
| Multilingual | ||
| MGSM | 73% | — |
| MMLU-ProX | 68% | — |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2023 | 61% | — |
| AIME 2024 | 63% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 62% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 57% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 59% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 58% | — |
| BRUMO 2025 | 60% | — |
| MATH-500 | 73% | — |
Claude 3 Opus is ahead overall, 49 to 47. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BBH, where the scores are 74% and 33.1%.
Gemma 4 E4B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.6 versus 46. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemma 4 E4B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 52 versus 17.7. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude 3 Opus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 61 versus 25.4. Inside this category, BBH is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude 3 Opus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.3 versus 52.6. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.