Roboflow

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemma 3 4B

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemma 3 4B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, and OCR.

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemma 3 4B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4.6
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGemma 3 4B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemma 3 4B: Overview

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is Anthropic's mid-tier large language model, released February 17, 2026, designed to balance performance, cost, and versatility for professional and developer use. It supports text and vision-based tasks with advanced reasoning, agentic capabilities, and Adaptive Thinking — a mode where the model dynamically scales its internal reasoning depth. A beta context window of up to 1,000,000 tokens (200K standard) enables processing of entire codebases or document collections in a single request. Parameters are undisclosed.

Optimized for coding, computer use, long-context reasoning, agent planning, and knowledge work, Sonnet 4.6 delivers a full generational upgrade over Sonnet 4.5 and approaches Opus 4.5-level performance across many benchmarks at a fraction of the cost. It is the default model on Claude.ai, Claude Cowork, and is available via API and major cloud platforms — making it well suited for production workloads requiring strong reasoning without flagship pricing.

Gemma 3 4B

Gemma 3 4B, released on March 12, 2025, is the mid-sized member of Google DeepMind’s open-weight Gemma 3 family. With about 4 billion parameters, it is multimodal—supporting text and image inputs and generating text outputs. Like the larger Gemma 3 models, it features a 128,000-token input context window with an output capacity of ~8,192 tokens, enabling it to handle long documents and mixed text–image reasoning tasks.

The 4B variant is designed as a balance between efficiency and capability: it offers multilingual support across 140+ languages, strong summarization and reasoning performance, and compatibility with moderate hardware. Inference can run with ~6.4 GB VRAM in BF16, or significantly less in quantized 8-bit (~4.4 GB) or 4-bit (~3.4 GB) modes, making it accessible to developers outside large-scale infrastructure. While it lags behind the 12B and 27B versions on the most complex reasoning and multimodal benchmarks, its lower compute footprint makes it ideal for research, prototyping, and practical deployment where efficiency matters.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Gemma 3 4B Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Sonnet 4.6Gemma 3 4B
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateFeb 2026Mar 2025
Context Window1.0M128K
Parameters4B
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$0.050
Output $/1M$15.00$0.100
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
ClassificationDemo
Object DetectionDemo
Model Features
Multimodal Vision
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
70.15%
37.31%
Avg Response Time4.24s16.80s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens2.2K
Median output tokens105
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0080
Defect Detection
80%(12/15)
60%(9/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
55.6%(5/9)
Object Counting
30%(3/10)
0%(0/10)
Object Understanding
71.4%(10/14)
42.9%(6/14)
Spatial Understanding
78.9%(15/19)
26.3%(5/19)
OCR
Overall Score
81.66%
64.19%
Avg Response Time3.42s0.92s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens736300
Median output tokens8512
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0035<$0.0001
Focused Scene OCR
85.9%(85/99)
63.6%(63/99)
Handwritten Math
50%(5/10)
10%(1/10)
License Plate Recognition
90%(27/30)
86.7%(26/30)
Text Recognition
86.7%(26/30)
73.3%(22/30)
VQA & Extraction
73.3%(44/60)
58.3%(35/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology