Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs MiniMax-M2.7

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.2

Rank #302 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.4

Rank #188 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 37.1 to 18.9.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
ProviderGoogleMiniMax
Noometry Index29.237.4
Released2024-06-242026-03-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K205K
Max output2K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$1.20
Results tracked3430

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.4 (#115)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Coding12111454
LMArena WebDev—1397
SciCode—47%
WeirdML—37%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—
ALE-Bench—599.25

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#103)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench—45.1%
ExploitBench—13.3%
GBAEval—0%

Reasoning MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.0 (#248)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Hard Prompts11991422
Epoch Capabilities Index122.06145.84
NYT Connections (extended)—24.7%
CritPt—0.6%
Thematic Generalization—39.3%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#254)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Math12121420
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
ProofBench—3%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.1 (#151)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Expert11721443
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
Confabulations27.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.9%
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.5 (#120)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English12171382
LMArena Chinese12211439
LMArena French12461422
LMArena German12091398
LMArena Japanese11751261
LMArena Korean11741313
LMArena Russian12341383
LMArena Spanish12281403

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.2 (#101)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following12061404
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#94)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query12311419

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), MiniMax-M2.7: 59.1 (#107)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text12311404
LMArena Creative Writing12411354
LMArena Multi-Turn12241413
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than MiniMax-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or MiniMax-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

Is Gemma 2 27B or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.7 does, with 205K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and MiniMax-M2.7 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper