Model comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 26 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B

Google

30.8

Rank #284 Confirmed

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Summary

They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 10 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 16.7.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B and 92.2% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 3 27B and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) specifications
	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Provider	Google	xAI
Noometry Index	30.8	48.6
Released	2025-03-11	2026-02-17
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	131K	1M
Max output	8K	30K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.08	$1.25
Output $ / M tokens	$0.16	$2.50
Results tracked	43	46

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Coding	1322	1459
Aider Polyglot	4.9%	—
LMArena WebDev	—	1375
SciCode	21.2%	—
WeirdML	—	52.3%
LiveBench Coding	39.9%	—
ALE-Bench	—	1,150

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Terminal-Bench	—	57.3%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	29.5%	—
τ²-bench Banking	—	18%
LMArena Search	—	1189
Vending-Bench 2	—	4,663

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Kagi LLM Benchmark	40.4%	75%
Chess Puzzles	0%	24%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1340	1451
DTBench	52.5%	90.1%
LMCA	12.3%	38.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index	130.04	151.98
ARC-AGI-2	—	65.1%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	85.4%
ARC-AGI-1	—	89.5%
CritPt	0%	—
Thematic Generalization	—	63.8%
LiveBench Reasoning	43.8%	—
LiveBench Data Analysis	51.5%	—
ForecastBench	—	61.4
LiveBench	50%	—

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	22.5%	92.2%
LMArena Math	1312	1455
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	44.9%
FrontierMath Tier 4	—	17.1%
ProofBench	—	14%
LiveBench Math	55.4%	—
MATH Level 5	74%	—

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
GPQA Diamond	47.7%	89.3%
LMArena Expert	1304	1439
SimpleQA Verified	—	30.2%
Confabulations	40.3%	—
Vectara Hallucination Rate	7.4%	—

Multimodal Too close to call

Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Vision	1164	1263
GeoBench	52%	—
Blueprint-Bench 2	—	0%
LMArena Document	—	1416

Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Non-English	1334	1441
LMArena Chinese	1346	1481
LMArena French	1368	1476
LMArena German	1362	1465
LMArena Japanese	1287	1449
LMArena Korean	1308	1417
LMArena Russian	1349	1458
LMArena Spanish	1349	1443

Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Instruction Following	1321	1420
LiveBench Instruction Following	74.9%	—

Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Longer Query	1333	1437
Fiction.LiveBench	33.3%	—
CL-bench	—	22.2%
CL-bench Life	—	11.9%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Text	1358	1451
LMArena Creative Writing	1346	1438
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1266	1574
LMArena Multi-Turn	1345	1456
Short-Story Creative Writing	79.9%	—
LiveBench Language	34.6%	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Is Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?

26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.