Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Muse Spark 1.2
Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
Google
MetaSummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.2 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 51.3 to 16.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 52.5% for Gemma 3 27B and 94.7% for Muse Spark 1.2.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.2.
- Muse Spark 1.2 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 1.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 50.3 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2026-08-05 |
| 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 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Muse Spark 1.2: 49.2 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 21.2% | 56.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1495 |
| DeepSWE | — | 54.9% |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1533 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 12% |
| WeirdML | — | 60.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Muse Spark 1.2: 29.4 (#87)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 36.4% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 16% |
Reasoning Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Muse Spark 1.2: 51.3 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 17.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1486 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 94.7% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 48.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 154.87 |
| SimpleBench | — | 74.5% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Muse Spark 1.2: 46.4 (#70)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1471 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 43% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Muse Spark 1.2: 54.1 (#53)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | 1480 |
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 60.3% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Muse Spark 1.2: 43.4 (#25)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1305 |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Muse Spark 1.2: 57.1 (#11)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1478 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1513 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1487 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | 1498 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |
Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Muse Spark 1.2: 76.7 (#36)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1461 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Muse Spark 1.2: 45.2 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1475 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Muse Spark 1.2: 72.3 (#14)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1482 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1449 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | 1840 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | 1494 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Muse Spark 1.2?
Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Muse Spark 1.2?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.2 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Muse Spark 1.2 better for coding?
Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.2 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.2 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Muse Spark 1.2 share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.2 has 31.