Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Grok 4.7
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 1 category and Grok 4.7 in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Grok 4.7 leads 55.0 to 22.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 21.2% for Gemma 3 27B and 57.4% for Grok 4.7.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 46.6 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 500K |
| Max output | 8K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 21.2% | 57.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1423 |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| CursorBench | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1636 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 29.5% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), Grok 4.7: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 17.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1409 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 76.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LMCA | 12.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1393 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 34% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1303 | 1413 |
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1165 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20.8% |
Multilingual Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1347 | 1476 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1396 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | — |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1348 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1406 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1416 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1391 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | 2007 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1344 | 1389 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.7?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.7 better for coding?
Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 22.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Grok 4.7 share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 21.