Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking
57
Winner · 3/8 categoriesGemma 4 E2B
~39
1/8 categoriesClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking· Gemma 4 E2B
Pick Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E2B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 57 to 39. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking's sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 73.1 against 19.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MRCRv2, 74% to 19.1%. Gemma 4 E2B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E2B.
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 4.1 Opus Thinking | Gemma 4 E2B |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| BrowseComp | 54% | — |
| CodingClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking wins | ||
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.5% | — |
| LiveCodeBench | 45% | 44% |
| SWE-bench Pro | 29% | — |
| Multimodal & GroundedClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking wins | ||
| OfficeQA Pro | 69% | — |
| MMMU-Pro | — | 44.2% |
| ReasoningClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking wins | ||
| MuSR | 72% | — |
| MRCRv2 | 74% | 19.1% |
| BBH | — | 21.9% |
| KnowledgeGemma 4 E2B wins | ||
| MMLU | 76% | — |
| GPQA | 80.9% | 43.4% |
| SuperGPQA | 72% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 76% | 60% |
| HLE | 8% | — |
| FrontierScience | 41% | — |
| SimpleQA | 36% | — |
| Instruction Following | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| Multilingual | ||
| MGSM | 82% | — |
| MMLU-ProX | 73% | — |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2024 | 40% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 36% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 35% | — |
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking is ahead overall, 57 to 39. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MRCRv2, where the scores are 74% and 19.1%.
Gemma 4 E2B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 54.1 versus 49. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 45.7 versus 44. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 73.1 versus 19.1. Inside this category, MRCRv2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 69 versus 44.2. Gemma 4 E2B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.