Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen1.5-72B
Gemma 3 27B and Qwen1.5-72B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.5 vs 30.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen1.5-72B in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemma 3 27B leads 52.7 to 37.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 47.7% for Gemma 3 27B and 28.8% for Qwen1.5-72B.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 30.3 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 8K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | — |
| Results tracked | 43 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-72B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.4 (#272)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1166 |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| SciCode | 21.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), Qwen1.5-72B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-72B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), Qwen1.5-72B: 21.2 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1148 |
| 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 Qwen1.5-72B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), Qwen1.5-72B: 30.7 (#205)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1164 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#295)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 28.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1303 | 1136 |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), Qwen1.5-72B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1165 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.4 (#248)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1347 | 1186 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1158 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1049 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1348 | 1110 |
Instruction Following Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.6 (#251)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1142 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Qwen1.5-72B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), Qwen1.5-72B: 35.0 (#238)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1157 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.4 (#253)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1344 | 1160 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Qwen1.5-72B?
Gemma 3 27B and Qwen1.5-72B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.5 vs 30.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.4 versus 22.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Qwen1.5-72B share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.