Model comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct

Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B Google

30.8

Rank #284 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct leads 42.0 to 27.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 40.4% for Gemma 3 27B and 49.5% for Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct.
  • Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct.
  • Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Gemma 3 27B and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct specifications
Gemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.838.1
Released2025-03-112025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K262K
Max output8K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.08$1.50
Output $ / M tokens$0.16$7.50
Results tracked4325

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct leads

Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 35.5 (#223)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Coding13221412
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—55.4%
Aider Polyglot4.9%—
LMArena WebDev—1275
SciCode21.2%—
GSO—4.9%
WeirdML—41.2%
LiveBench Coding39.9%—
ALE-Bench—461.45
AlgoTune—1.44

Agentic & Tool Use Gemma 3 27B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 23.9 (#123)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
Terminal-Bench—27.2%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard29.5%—

Reasoning Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct leads

Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 25.5 (#149)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.4%49.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts13401372
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles0%—
LiveBench Reasoning43.8%—
DTBench52.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis51.5%—
LMCA12.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index130.04—
LiveBench50%—

Math Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 37.6 (#150)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Math13121365
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202522.5%—
LiveBench Math55.4%—
MATH Level 574%—

Knowledge Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 37.0 (#162)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Expert13041338
GPQA Diamond47.7%—
Confabulations40.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Vision1164—
GeoBench52%—

Multilingual Too close to call

Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 47.7 (#148)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Non-English13341346
LMArena Chinese13461357
LMArena French13681398
LMArena German13621325
LMArena Japanese12871310
LMArena Korean13081305
LMArena Russian13491366
LMArena Spanish13491360

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 71.6 (#147)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following13211355
LiveBench Instruction Following74.9%—

Long Context Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct leads

Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 42.0 (#131)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query13331378
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%—

Writing & Preference Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct leads

Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 55.3 (#147)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Text13581357
LMArena Creative Writing13461333
LMArena Multi-Turn13451365
Short-Story Creative Writing79.9%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1266—
LiveBench Language34.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct lists at $1.50 and $7.50.

Is Gemma 3 27B or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.5 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has 25.

Related comparisons

Go deeper