Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen Max
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 28× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen Max in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Qwen Max leads 39.4 to 27.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 33.3% for Gemma 3 27B and 66.7% for Qwen Max.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- Gemma 3 27B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 33K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 34.7 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2024-04-03 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 33K |
| Max output | 8K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $1.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $6.40 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen Max leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | 21.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1288 |
| SciCode | 21.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Qwen Max: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen Max leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1269 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LMCA | 12.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1275 |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | 67.2% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |
Knowledge Qwen Max leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | 1248 |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Qwen Max: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1330 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | 1290 |
Instruction Following Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1262 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Qwen Max leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1288 |
Writing & Preference Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | 1277 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Qwen Max?
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 28× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Qwen Max?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Qwen Max better for coding?
Qwen Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.7 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemma 3 27B does, with 131K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Qwen Max share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.