# DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 2 27B

> DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-vs-gemma-2-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 22

## Summary

- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 2 27B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 66.7 to 10.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.3% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 8K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Google |
| Noometry Index | 52.8 | 29.4 |
| Rank | 38 | 312 |
| Context | 1M | 8K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.65 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $0.65 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.9 (#32)
- Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1506 | 1211 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1619 | — |
| SciCode | 51.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 42.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 36% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.5% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 31.2 (#69)
- Gemma 2 27B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 39.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 19.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 50.2 (#36)
- Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1483 | 1198 |
| DTBench | 89.9% | 48% |
| LMCA | 47% | 7.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.9 | 122.08 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | — |
| CritPt | 14.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 28.1% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 47.9% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 38.2% |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 66.7 (#25)
- Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 1.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1477 | 1212 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 67.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 26.5% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 27.9% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 57.9 (#38)
- Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.8% | 36.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1506 | 1172 |
| Confabulations | — | 27.1% |
| MMLU | — | 75.7% |

## Multimodal

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 39.1 (#61)
- Gemma 2 27B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1277 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 34.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.0 (#35)
- Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1448 | 1217 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1497 | 1221 |
| LMArena French | 1452 | 1247 |
| LMArena German | 1484 | 1209 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1412 | 1175 |
| LMArena Korean | 1452 | 1174 |
| LMArena Russian | 1471 | 1234 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1459 | 1228 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.3 (#26)
- Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1474 | 1206 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.1% |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#47)
- Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1475 | 1231 |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.4 (#48)
- Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1462 | 1231 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1435 | 1241 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1457 | 1224 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 32.6% |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Gemma 2 27B?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Gemma 2 27B?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.9 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 8K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Gemma 2 27B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 37 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.