Model comparison
Gemma 2 27B vs GLM-5V-Turbo
GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5V-Turbo's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5V-Turbo in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5V-Turbo leads 36.6 to 10.0.
- Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $4 for GLM-5V-Turbo.
- GLM-5V-Turbo accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 8K.
- Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.2 | 43.1 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 8K | 200K |
| Max output | 2K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $1.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $4 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), GLM-5V-Turbo: 41.8 (#105)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | 1467 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1400 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
Reasoning GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), GLM-5V-Turbo: 28.5 (#87)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1199 | 1443 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| DTBench | 48% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LMCA | 7.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |
Math GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), GLM-5V-Turbo: 36.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1212 | 1440 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | 1451 |
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| MMLU | 75.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: —, GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.1 (#41)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1264 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1416 |
Multilingual GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.2 (#69)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | 1420 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | 1488 |
| LMArena French | 1246 | 1443 |
| LMArena German | 1209 | 1422 |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | 1399 |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | 1432 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | 1446 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.1 (#75)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | 1422 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
Long Context GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#76)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | 1439 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.6 (#69)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | 1414 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | 1432 |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 27B better than GLM-5V-Turbo?
GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5V-Turbo's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or GLM-5V-Turbo?
Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; GLM-5V-Turbo lists at $1.20 and $4.
Is Gemma 2 27B or GLM-5V-Turbo better for coding?
GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5V-Turbo does, with 200K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and GLM-5V-Turbo share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5V-Turbo has 19.