Model comparison

Gemma 3 4B vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 27× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 6 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 4B

Google

28.1

Rank #326 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 27B

Alibaba (Qwen)

42.2

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 4B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 11.8.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 7.5% for Gemma 3 4B and 91.1% for Qwen3.6 27B.
Gemma 3 4B is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
Qwen3.6 27B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Gemma 3 4B and Qwen3.6 27B specifications
	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
Provider	Google	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	28.1	42.2
Released	2025-03-12	2026-04-22
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	131K	262K
Max output	4K	66K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.04	$0.60
Output $ / M tokens	$0.08	$3.60
Results tracked	22	11

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 3 4B: 35.9 (#215), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
SciCode	—	37.3%
LMArena Coding	1230	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 3 4B: 20.9 (#142), Qwen3.6 27B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	19.6%	—

Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 3 4B: 13.2 (#335), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
Chess Puzzles	0%	22%
DTBench	50.9%	78.1%
LMCA	2.8%	34.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index	116.02	146.5
Kagi LLM Benchmark	25.2%	—
CritPt	—	0.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1253	—
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	7%

Math Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 3 4B: 16.8 (#292), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	7.5%	91.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	35.1%
LMArena Math	1239	—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 3 4B: 11.8 (#299), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond	23.2%	85.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	6.4%	—
LMArena Expert	1223	—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 3 4B: 42.5 (#194), Qwen3.6 27B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Non-English	1273	—
LMArena German	1281	—
LMArena Russian	1294	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 3 4B: 65.2 (#225), Qwen3.6 27B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Instruction Following	1239	—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 3 4B: 38.7 (#194), Qwen3.6 27B: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Longer Query	1273	—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemma 3 4B: 42.0 (#239), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 4B	Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Text	1291	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1271	—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1068	—
EQ-Bench 4	—	1026
LMArena Multi-Turn	1255	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 4B better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 4B or Qwen3.6 27B?

Gemma 3 4B is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.

Is Gemma 3 4B or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.6 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 27B does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 4B and Qwen3.6 27B share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 4B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.