# Gemma 2 27B vs GPT-5 Nano

> GPT-5 Nano is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-27b-vs-gpt-5-nano
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 21

## Summary

- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 3 categories and GPT-5 Nano in 5 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5 Nano leads 29.1 to 10.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B and 81.1% for GPT-5 Nano.
- GPT-5 Nano is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
- GPT-5 Nano accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 8K.
- Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 29.2 | 33.4 |
| Rank | 302 | 234 |
| Context | 8K | 400K |
| Input $/M | $0.65 | $0.05 |
| Output $/M | $0.65 | $0.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243)
- GPT-5 Nano: 33.3 (#248)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | 1351 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 34.8% |
| WeirdML | — | 38.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 718.67 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 27B: —
- GPT-5 Nano: 25.6 (#99)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 21.8% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 51.5% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313)
- GPT-5 Nano: 16.4 (#291)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1199 | 1329 |
| DTBench | 48% | 62.7% |
| LMCA | 7.1% | 7.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.06 | 139.39 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 2.6% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 62.2% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 20.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 27% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.1 |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306)
- GPT-5 Nano: 29.1 (#221)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | 81.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1212 | 1318 |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | 95.2% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 20% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 2.4% |
| ProofBench | — | 12% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 54.6% |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 8.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275)
- GPT-5 Nano: 35.8 (#166)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | 69.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | 1321 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 11.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 77.8% |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.5% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 67.9% |
| MMLU | 75.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 2 27B: —
- GPT-5 Nano: 30.7 (#102)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1159 |
| VPCT | — | 37.2% |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221)
- GPT-5 Nano: 45.5 (#167)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | 1313 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | 1355 |
| LMArena German | 1209 | 1329 |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | 1269 |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | 1296 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | 1360 |
| LMArena French | 1246 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244)
- GPT-5 Nano: 75.2 (#72)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | 1306 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
| IFEval | — | 93.2% |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213)
- GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#275)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | 1313 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 44.4% |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220)
- GPT-5 Nano: 39.4 (#244)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | 1320 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | 1250 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | 1311 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 705 |
| WildBench | — | 80.6% |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 27B better than GPT-5 Nano?

GPT-5 Nano is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or GPT-5 Nano?

GPT-5 Nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

### Is Gemma 2 27B or GPT-5 Nano better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (33.5 vs 33.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5 Nano does, with 400K tokens against 8K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and GPT-5 Nano share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5 Nano has 48.