Model comparison
Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.7 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads 37.3 to 10.0.
- Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.2 | 44.7 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 8K | — |
| Max output | 2K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.65 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 43.4 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | 1488 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 29.6 (#81)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1199 | 1483 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| DTBench | 48% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LMCA | 7.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |
Math Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 37.3 (#99)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1212 | 1473 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.1 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | 1489 |
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| MMLU | 75.7% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.4 (#21)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | 1465 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | 1534 |
| LMArena French | 1246 | 1483 |
| LMArena German | 1209 | 1487 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | 1497 |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | 1438 |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | 1472 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | 1470 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.2 (#28)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | 1467 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | 1477 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.1 (#39)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | 1471 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | 1464 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | 1478 |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.7 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.5 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.