Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3.5 35B-A3B

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.0

Rank #123 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads 39.9 to 10.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B and 70% for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B.
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $2 for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B.
  • Qwen3.5 35B-A3B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.442.0
Released2024-06-242026-02-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K262K
Max output2K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$2
Results tracked3428

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 33.8 (#251)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Coding12111410
LMArena WebDev—1254
SciCode—29.3%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—

Reasoning Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 24.6 (#161)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Hard Prompts11981400
DTBench48%80%
LMCA7.1%29.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08142.52
CritPt—0.6%
Chess Puzzles—10%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 39.9 (#97)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%70%
LMArena Math12121404
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—56%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 47.8 (#79)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
GPQA Diamond36.5%83.5%
LMArena Expert11721408
Confabulations27.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 50.0 (#127)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Non-English12171378
LMArena Chinese12211457
LMArena French12471412
LMArena German12091367
LMArena Japanese11751325
LMArena Korean11741356
LMArena Russian12341376
LMArena Spanish12281392

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 72.8 (#128)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following12061379
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 42.4 (#127)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Longer Query12311389

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 57.9 (#124)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Text12311395
LMArena Creative Writing12411346
LMArena Multi-Turn12241390
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 35B-A3B lists at $0.25 and $2.

Is Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (34.1 vs 33.8); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B does, with 262K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper