Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen Max

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen Max in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen Max leads 22.3 to 10.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 27.9% for Gemma 2 27B and 67.2% for Qwen Max.
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
  • Qwen Max accepts more context: 33K tokens versus 8K.
  • Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BQwen Max
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.434.7
Released2024-06-242024-04-03
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window8K33K
Max output2K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$1.60
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$6.40
Results tracked3423

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

Category by category

Coding Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
LMArena Coding12111288
Aider Polyglot—21.8%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—

Reasoning Qwen Max leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
LMArena Hard Prompts11981269
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math Qwen Max leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%16.1%
LMArena Math12121275
MATH Level 527.9%67.2%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—1%

Knowledge Qwen Max leads

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
GPQA Diamond36.5%56.1%
LMArena Expert11721248
Confabulations27.1%—
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual Qwen Max leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
LMArena Non-English12171263
LMArena Chinese12211254
LMArena French12471330
LMArena German12091254
LMArena Japanese11751205
LMArena Korean11741142
LMArena Russian12341274
LMArena Spanish12281290

Instruction Following Qwen Max leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
LMArena Instruction Following12061262
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context Qwen Max leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
LMArena Longer Query12311288
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%

Writing & Preference Qwen Max leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen Max
LMArena Text12311282
LMArena Creative Writing12411248
LMArena Multi-Turn12241277
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen Max?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

Is Gemma 2 27B or Qwen Max better for coding?

Gemma 2 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Max does, with 33K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen Max share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper