Model comparison
Gemma 2 27B vs Mistral Medium 3.1
Mistral Medium 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.9 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Mistral AISummary
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mistral Medium 3.1 leads 55.5 to 44.2.
- Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2 for Mistral Medium 3.1.
- Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 8K.
- Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 31.9 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 8K | 131K |
| Max output | 2K | 105K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $2 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
Reasoning Gemma 2 27B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 6.5% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 20.3% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1198 | — |
| DTBench | 48% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LMCA | 7.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.08 | — |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1212 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | — |
| MMLU | 75.7% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | — |
| LMArena French | 1247 | — |
| LMArena German | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | — |
Writing & Preference Mistral Medium 3.1 leads
Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1476 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 27B better than Mistral Medium 3.1?
Mistral Medium 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.9 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Mistral Medium 3.1?
Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 lists at $0.40 and $2.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mistral Medium 3.1 does, with 131K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.1 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3.