# DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemma 3 27B

> DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 9.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-pro-vs-gemma-3-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 28

## Summary

- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in 9 categories and Gemma 3 27B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Pro leads 56.5 to 16.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.6% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1.98 for DeepSeek V4 Pro.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Google |
| Noometry Index | 54.3 | 30.8 |
| Rank | 31 | 284 |
| Context | 1M | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.66 | $0.08 |
| Output $/M | $1.98 | $0.16 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 52.4 (#34)
- Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 51% | 21.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1470 | 1322 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 77.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 28.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 4.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1582 | — |
| WeirdML | 66.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 39.9% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,403 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 32.8 (#58)
- Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 47.3% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 29.5% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,285 | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 56.5 (#24)
- Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.5% | 40.4% |
| CritPt | 18% | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1340 |
| DTBench | 93.9% | 52.5% |
| LMCA | 45.5% | 12.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.31 | 130.04 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 43.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 51.5% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 40% | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.1 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 50% |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 64.8 (#30)
- Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.6% | 22.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1312 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 64.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 55.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 74% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 59.5 (#31)
- Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | 47.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.6% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1464 | 1304 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.9% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 40.3% |

## Multimodal

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: —
- Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
| GeoBench | — | 52% |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 54.4 (#45)
- Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 1334 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1486 | 1346 |
| LMArena French | 1472 | 1368 |
| LMArena German | 1458 | 1362 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1445 | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | 1447 | 1308 |
| LMArena Russian | 1453 | 1349 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | 1349 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 76.1 (#47)
- Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1448 | 1321 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 74.9% |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 45.0 (#51)
- Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1458 | 1333 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 33.3% |
| CL-bench Life | 13.5% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 65.5 (#46)
- Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1358 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1446 | 1346 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1553 | 1266 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | 1345 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 79.9% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1166 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 34.6% |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemma 3 27B?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 9.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemma 3 27B?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V4 Pro lists at $0.66 and $1.98.

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemma 3 27B better for coding?

DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.4 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4 Pro does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemma 3 27B share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Pro has 48 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3 27B has 43.