Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen Turbo

Gemma 3 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.5 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B Google

30.5

Rank #277 Confirmed

Qwen Turbo Alibaba (Qwen)

26.8

Rank #329 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Turbo in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 3 27B leads 24.4 to 14.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 74% for Gemma 3 27B and 56.2% for Qwen Turbo.
  • Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.08 / $0.16 for Gemma 3 27B.
  • Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.526.8
Released2025-03-112024-11-01
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K1M
Max output8K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.08$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$0.16$0.20
Results tracked433

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
Aider Polyglot4.9%—
SciCode21.2%—
LiveBench Coding39.9%—
LMArena Coding1322—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard29.5%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.4%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles0%—
LiveBench Reasoning43.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1340—
DTBench52.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis51.5%—
LMCA12.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index130.04—
LiveBench50%—

Math Gemma 3 27B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), Qwen Turbo: 14.5 (#291)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202522.5%6.1%
MATH Level 574%56.2%
LiveBench Math55.4%—
LMArena Math1312—

Knowledge Gemma 3 27B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#267)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
GPQA Diamond47.7%41.8%
Confabulations40.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—
LMArena Expert1303—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
LMArena Vision1165—
GeoBench52%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
LMArena Non-English1334—
LMArena Chinese1347—
LMArena French1368—
LMArena German1362—
LMArena Japanese1287—
LMArena Korean1308—
LMArena Russian1349—
LMArena Spanish1348—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
LiveBench Instruction Following74.9%—
LMArena Instruction Following1321—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%—
LMArena Longer Query1333—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen Turbo
LMArena Text1358—
LMArena Creative Writing1346—
Short-Story Creative Writing79.9%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1266—
LMArena Multi-Turn1344—
LiveBench Language34.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Qwen Turbo?

Gemma 3 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.5 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Qwen Turbo?

Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Gemma 3 27B lists at $0.08 and $0.16.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Qwen Turbo share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper