Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3.5 Plus

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

42.9

Rank #106 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Plus in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 49.6 to 10.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B and 86.7% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2.40 for Qwen3.5 Plus.
  • Qwen3.5 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 8K.
  • Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.442.9
Released2024-06-242026-02-16
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window8K1M
Max output2K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$2.40
Results tracked3415

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
LMArena Coding1211—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—
ALE-Bench—621.92

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
Vending-Bench 2—0.54

Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.8 (#74)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
DTBench48%80.5%
LMCA7.1%36.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08146.78
Chess Puzzles—22%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1198—
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Qwen3.5 Plus: 49.6 (#61)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%86.7%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
LMArena Math1212—
MATH Level 527.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—21%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#83)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
GPQA Diamond36.5%84.8%
SimpleQA Verified—25.4%
Confabulations27.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.7%
LMArena Expert1172—
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Non-English1217—
LMArena Chinese1221—
LMArena French1247—
LMArena German1209—
LMArena Japanese1175—
LMArena Korean1174—
LMArena Russian1234—
LMArena Spanish1228—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—
LMArena Instruction Following1206—

Long Context Qwen3.5 Plus leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Qwen3.5 Plus: 43.0 (#113)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
CL-bench—19.8%
CL-bench Life—12.4%
LMArena Longer Query1231—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Text1231—
LMArena Creative Writing1241—
LMArena Multi-Turn1224—
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen3.5 Plus?

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3.5 Plus?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus lists at $0.40 and $2.40.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5 Plus share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper