Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs Hunyuan Vision 1.5

Hunyuan Vision 1.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B Google

30.8

Rank #284 Confirmed

Hunyuan Vision 1.5 Tencent

43.1

Rank #98 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads 41.8 to 22.5.
  • Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
ProviderGoogleTencent
Noometry Index30.843.1
Released2025-03-11—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.08—
Output $ / M tokens$0.16—
Results tracked439

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

Category by category

Coding Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 41.8 (#119)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
LMArena Coding13221418
Aider Polyglot4.9%—
SciCode21.2%—
LiveBench Coding39.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard29.5%—

Reasoning Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 28.9 (#97)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
LMArena Hard Prompts13401416
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.4%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles0%—
LiveBench Reasoning43.8%—
DTBench52.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis51.5%—
LMCA12.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index130.04—
LiveBench50%—

Math Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202522.5%—
LiveBench Math55.4%—
LMArena Math1312—
MATH Level 574%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
GPQA Diamond47.7%—
Confabulations40.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—
LMArena Expert1304—

Multimodal Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 35.7 (#84)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
LMArena Vision11641180
GeoBench52%—

Multilingual Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 50.3 (#125)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
LMArena Non-English13341382
LMArena Chinese1346—
LMArena French1368—
LMArena German1362—
LMArena Japanese1287—
LMArena Korean1308—
LMArena Russian1349—
LMArena Spanish1349—

Instruction Following Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 73.7 (#117)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
LMArena Instruction Following13211397
LiveBench Instruction Following74.9%—

Long Context Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 42.9 (#115)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
LMArena Longer Query13331404
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%—

Writing & Preference Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 60.1 (#100)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BHunyuan Vision 1.5
LMArena Text13581405
LMArena Creative Writing13461388
LMArena Multi-Turn13451422
Short-Story Creative Writing79.9%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1266—
LiveBench Language34.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Hunyuan Vision 1.5?

Hunyuan Vision 1.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 3 27B or Hunyuan Vision 1.5 better for coding?

Hunyuan Vision 1.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 has 9.

Related comparisons

Go deeper