Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 3 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 5 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads 26.8 to 10.7.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27B and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct specifications
Gemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
ProviderGoogleAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index29.432.7
Released2024-06-24—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K—
Max output2K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.65—
Output $ / M tokens$0.65—
Results tracked3416

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

Category by category

Coding Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding12111210
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—

Reasoning Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts11981208
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Math12121208
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
Omni-MATH—16.1%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge Too close to call

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
MMLU-Pro—41.4%
Confabulations27.1%—
GPQA (HELM)—28.7%
LMArena Expert1172—
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English12171160
LMArena Chinese12211192
LMArena Russian12341187
LMArena French1247—
LMArena German1209—
LMArena Japanese1175—
LMArena Korean1174—
LMArena Spanish1228—

Instruction Following Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following12061186
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—
IFEval—78%

Long Context Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query12311194

Writing & Preference Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Text12311218
LMArena Creative Writing12411199
LMArena Multi-Turn12241221
WildBench—73.4%
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 27B or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.2 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper