Model comparison
DeepSeek LLM 67B vs Gemma 2 27B
Gemma 2 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.4 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
GoogleSummary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 1 category and Gemma 2 27B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemma 2 27B leads 44.2 to 31.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 6.4% for DeepSeek LLM 67B and 27.9% for Gemma 2 27B.
Side by side
| DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 29.4 |
| Released | 2023-11-29 | 2024-06-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 8K |
| Max output | — | 2K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.65 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.65 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.9 (#278), Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1096 | 1211 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 42.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 36% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.5% |
Reasoning DeepSeek LLM 67B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 16.5 (#304), Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1070 | 1198 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 110.5 | 122.08 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 28.1% |
| DTBench | — | 48% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 47.9% |
| LMCA | — | 7.1% |
| LiveBench | — | 38.2% |
Math Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.7 (#324), Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.8% | 1.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1108 | 1212 |
| MATH Level 5 | 6.4% | 27.9% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 26.5% |
Knowledge Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.0 (#313), Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 24.6% | 36.5% |
| Confabulations | — | 27.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1172 |
| MMLU | — | 75.7% |
Multilingual Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.4 (#267), Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1073 | 1217 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | 1221 |
| LMArena French | — | 1247 |
| LMArena German | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1175 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1174 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1234 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1228 |
Instruction Following Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.4 (#277), Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1079 | 1206 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.1% |
Long Context Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#265), Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1092 | 1231 |
Writing & Preference Gemma 2 27B leads
DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.6 (#282), Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1105 | 1231 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1067 | 1241 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1082 | 1224 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 32.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than Gemma 2 27B?
Gemma 2 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.4 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?
Gemma 2 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and Gemma 2 27B share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.