Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Mistral Small 3.2

Mistral Small 3.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.2 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Mistral Small 3.2 Mistral AI

31.2

Rank #280 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Mistral Small 3.2 in 4 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Mistral Small 3.2 leads 26.3 to 10.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B and 30.3% for Mistral Small 3.2.
  • Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.0938 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
  • Mistral Small 3.2 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
ProviderGoogleMistral AI
Noometry Index29.431.2
Released2024-06-242025-06-20
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K256K
Max output2K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.0938
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$0.25
Results tracked346

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 Small 3.2: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
LMArena Coding1211—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—

Reasoning Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Mistral Small 3.2: 18.1 (#287)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08131.74
Kagi LLM Benchmark—40.4%
Chess Puzzles—1%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1198—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Mistral Small 3.2: 26.3 (#260)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%30.3%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
LMArena Math1212—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Mistral Small 3.2: 26.7 (#256)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
GPQA Diamond36.5%49.1%
Confabulations27.1%—
LMArena Expert1172—
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Mistral Small 3.2: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
LMArena Non-English1217—
LMArena Chinese1221—
LMArena French1247—
LMArena German1209—
LMArena Japanese1175—
LMArena Korean1174—
LMArena Russian1234—
LMArena Spanish1228—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Mistral Small 3.2: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—
LMArena Instruction Following1206—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Mistral Small 3.2: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
LMArena Longer Query1231—

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Mistral Small 3.2: 45.0 (#224)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Small 3.2
LMArena Text1231—
LMArena Creative Writing1241—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1255
LMArena Multi-Turn1224—
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Mistral Small 3.2?

Mistral Small 3.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.2 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Mistral Small 3.2?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0938 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Small 3.2 does, with 256K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Small 3.2 share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Small 3.2 has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper