Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 33 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B Google

30.5

Rank #277 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.4

Rank #153 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 33 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 2 categories and QwQ-32B in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 27.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 33.3% for Gemma 3 27B and 83.3% for QwQ-32B.

Side by side

Gemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.539.4
Released2025-03-112024-11-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.08—
Output $ / M tokens$0.16—
Results tracked4336

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

Category by category

Coding QwQ-32B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot4.9%20.9%
LiveBench Coding39.9%72.2%
LMArena Coding13221333
SciCode21.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard29.5%—

Reasoning QwQ-32B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles0%5%
LiveBench Reasoning43.8%83.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts13401326
LiveBench Data Analysis51.5%65%
Epoch Capabilities Index130.04137.6
LiveBench50%72%
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.4%—
CritPt0%—
DTBench52.5%—
LMCA12.3%—
ForecastBench—58.3

Math QwQ-32B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202522.5%59.2%
LiveBench Math55.4%77.8%
LMArena Math13121359
MATH Level 574%—

Knowledge QwQ-32B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond47.7%65.3%
Confabulations40.3%15.6%
LMArena Expert13031323
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
LMArena Vision1165—
GeoBench52%—

Multilingual Gemma 3 27B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English13341306
LMArena Chinese13471378
LMArena French13681337
LMArena German13621313
LMArena Japanese12871263
LMArena Korean13081278
LMArena Russian13491297
LMArena Spanish13481353

Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following74.9%81.8%
LMArena Instruction Following13211297

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%83.3%
LMArena Longer Query13331308

Writing & Preference Gemma 3 27B leads

Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwQ-32B
LMArena Text13581329
LMArena Creative Writing13461288
Short-Story Creative Writing79.9%80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing12661257
LMArena Multi-Turn13441314
LiveBench Language34.6%51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 3 27B or QwQ-32B better for coding?

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.9 versus 22.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and QwQ-32B share?

33 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper