Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 57.6 to 25.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B and 91.1% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 51.1 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Max output | 8K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $1.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $7.80 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.6 (#50)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1472 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1482 |
| SciCode | 21.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,254 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 40.8 (#47)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1457 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 87.2% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 42.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 149.27 |
| SimpleBench | — | 63% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.1% |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 19% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 52.2 (#40)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1465 |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 23.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#35)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 87.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1303 | 1476 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 52% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1165 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1436 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1347 | 1487 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1449 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1444 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1348 | 1452 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.8 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1437 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1457 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 64.0 (#58)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1344 | 1456 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 22.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview does, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.