Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 48.2 to 10.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B and 92.2% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
  • Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 8K.
  • Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
ProviderGooglexAI
Noometry Index29.448.6
Released2024-06-242026-02-17
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window8K1M
Max output2K30K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$2.50
Results tracked3446

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Coding12111459
LMArena WebDev—1375
WeirdML—52.3%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—
ALE-Bench—1,150

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Terminal-Bench—57.3%
τ²-bench Banking—18%
LMArena Search—1189
Vending-Bench 2—4,663

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Hard Prompts11981451
DTBench48%90.1%
LMCA7.1%38.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08151.98
ARC-AGI-2—65.1%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—75%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.4%
ARC-AGI-1—89.5%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Thematic Generalization—63.8%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
ForecastBench—61.4
LiveBench38.2%—

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%92.2%
LMArena Math12121455
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—44.9%
FrontierMath Tier 4—17.1%
ProofBench—14%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
GPQA Diamond36.5%89.3%
LMArena Expert11721439
SimpleQA Verified—30.2%
Confabulations27.1%—
MMLU75.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Vision—1263
Blueprint-Bench 2—0%
LMArena Document—1416

Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Non-English12171441
LMArena Chinese12211481
LMArena French12471476
LMArena German12091465
LMArena Japanese11751449
LMArena Korean11741417
LMArena Russian12341458
LMArena Spanish12281443

Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Instruction Following12061420
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Longer Query12311437
CL-bench—22.2%
CL-bench Life—11.9%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Text12311451
LMArena Creative Writing12411438
LMArena Multi-Turn12241456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1574
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Is Gemma 2 27B or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.

Related comparisons

Go deeper