Model comparison
Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Gemma 2 27B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.4 vs 29.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads 48.8 to 44.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 52.5% for Gemma 2 27B and 46.1% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 8K.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 8K | 131K |
| Max output | 2K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | 46.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 48% | 47.7% |
| LMCA | 7.1% | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.08 | 118.51 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1198 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |
Math Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1212 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |
Knowledge Gemma 2 27B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | 35.5% |
| MMLU | 75.7% | 72.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Gemma 2 27B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.4 vs 29.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.
Is Gemma 2 27B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.5 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.