Model comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B Google

30.8

Rank #284 Confirmed

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) Moonshot AI

41.2

Rank #140 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) in 9 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads 42.4 to 22.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 4.9% for Gemma 3 27B and 59.1% for Kimi K2 (Jul 2025).
  • Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $0.57 / $2.30 for Kimi K2 (Jul 2025).
  • Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Gemma 3 27B and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) specifications
Gemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
ProviderGoogleMoonshot AI
Noometry Index30.841.2
Released2025-03-112025-07-12
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K262K
Max output8K262K
Input $ / M tokens$0.08$0.57
Output $ / M tokens$0.16$2.30
Results tracked4342

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 42.4 (#102)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
Aider Polyglot4.9%59.1%
LMArena Coding13221399
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—63.4%
SciCode21.2%—
GSO—4.9%
WeirdML—42.8%
LiveBench Coding39.9%—
ALE-Bench—597.5

Agentic & Tool Use Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 32.4 (#64)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard29.5%59.1%
Terminal-Bench—35.7%
METR Time Horizons—59.2%

Reasoning Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 23.3 (#179)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.4%64.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts13401384
Epoch Capabilities Index130.04146.01
SimpleBench—26.3%
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles0%—
LiveBench Reasoning43.8%—
DTBench52.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis51.5%—
LMCA12.3%—
ForecastBench—60.2
LiveBench50%—

Math Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 42.7 (#83)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Math13121397
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202522.5%—
Omni-MATH—65.4%
LiveBench Math55.4%—
MATH Level 574%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—21.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 37.3 (#157)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
Confabulations40.3%20.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%17.9%
LMArena Expert13041365
GPQA Diamond47.7%—
MMLU-Pro—81.9%
GPQA (HELM)—65.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Vision1164—
GeoBench52%—

Multilingual Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 49.6 (#130)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Non-English13341372
LMArena Chinese13461415
LMArena French13681379
LMArena German13621387
LMArena Japanese12871349
LMArena Korean13081325
LMArena Russian13491385
LMArena Spanish13491386

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 71.1 (#156)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Instruction Following13211348
LiveBench Instruction Following74.9%—
IFEval—85%

Long Context Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 41.2 (#145)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%66.7%
LMArena Longer Query13331353
CL-bench—17.6%

Writing & Preference Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 62.3 (#78)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BKimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Text13581380
LMArena Creative Writing13461350
Short-Story Creative Writing79.9%85.6%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing12661666
LMArena Multi-Turn13451371
WildBench—86.2%
LiveBench Language34.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.2 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) lists at $0.57 and $2.30.

Is Gemma 3 27B or Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) better for coding?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) share?

26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper