Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs Gemma 2 27B
Gemma 2 27B has enough public results to be ranked (#312); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
GoogleSummary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher in 0 categories and Gemma 2 27B in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 29.6% for DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and 52.5% for Gemma 2 27B.
Side by side
| DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | |
| Noometry Index | 35.0 | 29.4 |
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2024-06-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 8K |
| Max output | — | 2K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.65 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.65 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 31.2 (#287), Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 22.8% | 42.8% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 29.6% | 52.5% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 36% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1211 |
| HumanEval+ | 60.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 54.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 63.6 | 122.08 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 28.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1198 |
| DTBench | — | 48% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 47.9% |
| LMCA | — | 7.1% |
| LiveBench | — | 38.2% |
| WinoGrande | 53.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 1.4% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 26.5% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1212 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 27.9% |
| GSM8K | 4.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 25.8% | 75.7% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 36.5% |
| Confabulations | — | 27.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1172 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 25.4% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1217 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1221 |
| LMArena French | — | 1247 |
| LMArena German | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1175 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1174 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1234 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1228 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1206 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1231 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1241 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1224 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 32.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than Gemma 2 27B?
Gemma 2 27B has enough public results to be ranked (#312); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?
Gemma 2 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and Gemma 2 27B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.