Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Grok Build 0.1

Grok Build 0.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.8 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok Build 0.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.2

Rank #302 Confirmed

Grok Build 0.1 xAI

35.8

Rank #214 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok Build 0.1 leads 31.3 to 14.8.
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $2 for Grok Build 0.1.
  • Grok Build 0.1 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 8K.
  • Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
ProviderGooglexAI
Noometry Index29.235.8
Released2024-06-242026-04-16
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window8K256K
Max output2K256K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$1
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$2
Results tracked343

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

Category by category

Coding Grok Build 0.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), Grok Build 0.1: 42.5 (#90)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
SciCode—50.2%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
LMArena Coding1211—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, Grok Build 0.1: 22.5 (#122)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
GBAEval—2.4%

Reasoning Grok Build 0.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), Grok Build 0.1: 31.3 (#73)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
CritPt—9.1%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1199—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.06—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), Grok Build 0.1: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
LiveBench Math26.5%—
LMArena Math1212—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), Grok Build 0.1: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
Confabulations27.1%—
LMArena Expert1172—
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), Grok Build 0.1: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
LMArena Non-English1217—
LMArena Chinese1221—
LMArena French1246—
LMArena German1209—
LMArena Japanese1175—
LMArena Korean1174—
LMArena Russian1234—
LMArena Spanish1228—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), Grok Build 0.1: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—
LMArena Instruction Following1206—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), Grok Build 0.1: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
LMArena Longer Query1231—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), Grok Build 0.1: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGrok Build 0.1
LMArena Text1231—
LMArena Creative Writing1241—
LMArena Multi-Turn1224—
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Grok Build 0.1?

Grok Build 0.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.8 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok Build 0.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Grok Build 0.1?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Grok Build 0.1 lists at $1 and $2.

Is Gemma 2 27B or Grok Build 0.1 better for coding?

Grok Build 0.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok Build 0.1 does, with 256K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Grok Build 0.1 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Grok Build 0.1 has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper