Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Muse Spark 1.1
Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.1 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 47.1 to 16.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 52.5% for Gemma 3 27B and 94.4% for Muse Spark 1.1.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.1.
- Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 49.9 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2026-04-08 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 8K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $4.25 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Muse Spark 1.1: 51.3 (#40)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 21.2% | 58.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1498 |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.3% |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1542 |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Muse Spark 1.1: 30.8 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 31.8% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 40.5% |
| GBAEval | — | 7.9% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 15% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,520 |
Reasoning Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Muse Spark 1.1: 47.1 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 15.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1486 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 94.4% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 49.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 154.21 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 84.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 52.5% |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Muse Spark 1.1: 45.5 (#76)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1483 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 39% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Muse Spark 1.1: 53.1 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | 1478 |
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 57.8% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Muse Spark 1.1: 42.6 (#29)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1293 |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
| LMArena Document | — | 1465 |
Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Muse Spark 1.1: 56.7 (#17)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | 1518 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1494 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1451 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1458 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1483 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | 1464 |
Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Muse Spark 1.1: 76.5 (#39)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1457 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#58)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1462 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Muse Spark 1.1: 73.4 (#11)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1479 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1437 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | 1927 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | 1485 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1260 |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Muse Spark 1.1?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.1 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?
Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Muse Spark 1.1 share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 37.