Model comparison

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B vs Gemma 2 27B

Gemma 2 27B has enough public results to be ranked (#312); DeepSeek Coder 6.7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B DeepSeek

37.6

Unranked Sparse

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 6.7B scores higher in 1 category and Gemma 2 27B in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 43.8% for DeepSeek Coder 6.7B and 52.5% for Gemma 2 27B.

Side by side

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B and Gemma 2 27B specifications
DeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
ProviderDeepSeekGoogle
Noometry Index37.629.4
Released2023-11-022024-06-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—8K
Max output—2K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.65
Output $ / M tokens—$0.65
Results tracked934

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek Coder 6.7B leads

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: 35.8 (#219), Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
BigCodeBench Instruct35.5%42.8%
BigCodeBench Complete43.8%52.5%
LiveBench Coding—36%
LMArena Coding—1211
HumanEval+71.3%—
MBPP+65.6%—

Reasoning Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
Epoch Capabilities Index89.62122.08
LiveBench Reasoning—28.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1198
DTBench—48%
LiveBench Data Analysis—47.9%
LMCA—7.1%
LiveBench—38.2%
WinoGrande57.6%—

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—1.4%
LiveBench Math—26.5%
LMArena Math—1212
MATH Level 5—27.9%
GSM8K21.3%—

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
MMLU36.4%75.7%
GPQA Diamond—36.5%
Confabulations—27.1%
LMArena Expert—1172
ARC (AI2) Challenge36.4%—

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 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 6.7B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.1%
LMArena Instruction Following—1206

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
LMArena Longer Query—1231

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 6.7BGemma 2 27B
LMArena Text—1231
LMArena Creative Writing—1241
LMArena Multi-Turn—1224
LiveBench Language—32.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek Coder 6.7B better than Gemma 2 27B?

Gemma 2 27B has enough public results to be ranked (#312); DeepSeek Coder 6.7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is DeepSeek Coder 6.7B or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?

DeepSeek Coder 6.7B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.8 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 6.7B and Gemma 2 27B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 6.7B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper