ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Mistral Large 2.1 vs Gemma 2 27B vs Claude Haiku 3.5

Claude Haiku 3.5 comes out ahead, 46 to 38 and 35 on our weighted score, though Gemma 2 27B is 2.5× cheaper per token.

  1. Mistral AI

    Mistral Large 2.1

    Released Nov 18, 2024

    38/100
    • ECI128.6
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Mistral Large 2.1

  2. Google

    Gemma 2 27B

    Released Jul 13, 2024

    35/100
    • ECI122.1
    • Price$0.65 / $0.65
    • Context8K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 2 27B
  3. Our pick

    Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 3.5

    Released Oct 22, 2024

    46/100
    • ECI127.0
    • Price$0.80 / $4.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 3.5
01 — Verdict

Claude Haiku 3.5 is our pick

Claude Haiku 3.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 46/100 against Mistral Large 2.1 (38) and Gemma 2 27B (35). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Mistral Large 2.1 wins on capability. Gemma 2 27B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityMistral Large 2.1Capabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Large 2.1 128.6 · Claude Haiku 3.5 127.0 · Gemma 2 27B 122.1
  • Lowest priceGemma 2 27BGemma 2 27B $0.65 · Claude Haiku 3.5 $1.60 · Mistral Large 2.1 $3.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Haiku 3.5Claude Haiku 3.5 200,000 · Mistral Large 2.1 131,072 · Gemma 2 27B 8,192 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 3.5Mistral Large 2.1: Text · Gemma 2 27B: Text · Claude Haiku 3.5: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingMistral Large 2.1 and Gemma 2 27BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMistral Large 2.1Gemma 2 27BClaude Haiku 3.5
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%504248
Price25%265638
Inputs & features15%25060
Context window10%25032
Overall100%38/10035/10046/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Mistral Large 2.1 vs Gemma 2 27B vs Claude Haiku 3.5 specifications side by side
SpecificationMistral Large 2.1Mistral AIGemma 2 27BGoogleClaude Haiku 3.5Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)128.6 (best)122.1127.0
ECI rank#142 of 165 (best)#152 of 165#147 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions51.3% (best)36.5%38.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics7.8% (best)1.4%4.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$2.00$0.65 (best)$0.80
Output$6.00$0.65 (best)$4.00
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$3.00$0.65 (best)$1.60
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersMedian of 3 providersMedian of 3 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens8,192 tokens200,000 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens (best)2,048 tokens8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoYes
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingYesNoYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenProprietary
API model ID———
API providers234 (best)
ReleasedNov 18, 2024Jul 13, 2024Oct 22, 2024
Knowledge cutoffNov 2024Jun 30, 2024Jul 31, 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Mistral Large 2.1$32.00
  • Gemma 2 27B$7.80
  • Claude Haiku 3.5$16.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Mistral Large 2.1, Gemma 2 27B or Claude Haiku 3.5?

Claude Haiku 3.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 46/100 against Mistral Large 2.1 (38) and Gemma 2 27B (35). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Mistral Large 2.1 wins on capability. Gemma 2 27B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Large 2.1, Gemma 2 27B or Claude Haiku 3.5?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 input / $0.65 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Claude Haiku 3.5 costs $0.80 input / $4.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers); Mistral Large 2.1 costs $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.65 per million tokens for Gemma 2 27B versus $1.60 for Claude Haiku 3.5 (2.5× as much) and $3.00 for Mistral Large 2.1 (4.6× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Mistral Large 2.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Large 2.1 128.6 (#142 of 165), Claude Haiku 3.5 127.0 (#147 of 165) and Gemma 2 27B 122.1 (#152 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (124.3–130.7 vs 121.4–129.2), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Mistral Large 2.1 51.3%, Claude Haiku 3.5 38.1%, Gemma 2 27B 36.5%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Mistral Large 2.1 7.8%, Claude Haiku 3.5 4.3%, Gemma 2 27B 1.4%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mistral Large 2.1, Gemma 2 27B and Claude Haiku 3.5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Mistral Large 2.1 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Note that Gemma 2 27B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 3.5 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Mistral Large 2.1 and 8,192 for Gemma 2 27B. Maximum output per response: Mistral Large 2.1 up to 16,384, Gemma 2 27B up to 2,048, Claude Haiku 3.5 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Mistral Large 2.1 accepts text; Gemma 2 27B accepts text; Claude Haiku 3.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Haiku 3.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Mistral Large 2.1 and Gemma 2 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 3.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Mistral Large 2.1 is the newest, released Nov 18, 2024. Claude Haiku 3.5 came out Oct 22, 2024; Gemma 2 27B came out Jul 13, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Mistral Large 2.1 Nov 2024, Gemma 2 27B Jun 30, 2024, Claude Haiku 3.5 Jul 31, 2024.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons