Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs o3-pro
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 350× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and o3-pro in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where o3-pro leads 72.1 to 27.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 4.9% for Gemma 3 27B and 84.9% for o3-pro.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-pro.
- o3-pro accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 42.7 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2025-06-10 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 200K |
| Max output | 8K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $80 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o3-pro leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), o3-pro: 55.1 (#22)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | 84.9% |
| SciCode | 21.2% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 58.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
Reasoning o3-pro leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), o3-pro: 24.1 (#152)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | 72.1% |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 86.9% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 38.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 147.43 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 59.3% |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge o3-pro leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), o3-pro: 29.0 (#234)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 40.3% | 14.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | 23.3% |
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1303 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1165 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1347 | — |
| LMArena French | 1368 | — |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1348 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | — |
Long Context o3-pro leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), o3-pro: 72.1 (#1)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | 97.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | — |
Writing & Preference o3-pro leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), o3-pro: 57.1 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | 84.4% |
| LMArena Text | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1344 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than o3-pro?
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 350× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or o3-pro?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.
Is Gemma 3 27B or o3-pro better for coding?
o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.1 versus 22.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
o3-pro does, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and o3-pro share?
9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and o3-pro has 12.