# Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

> Gemma 2 27B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.2 vs 28.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-27b-vs-qwen2-5-7b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 8

## Summary

- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads 48.8 to 44.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 52.5% for Gemma 2 27B and 46.1% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 8K.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.2 | 28.6 |
| Rank | 302 | 314 |
| Context | 8K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.65 | $0.17 |
| Output $/M | $0.65 | $0.70 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | 46.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 27B: —
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 48% | 47.7% |
| LMCA | 7.1% | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.06 | 118.44 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1199 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1212 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | 35.5% |
| MMLU | 75.7% | 72.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | — |
| LMArena French | 1246 | — |
| LMArena German | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Gemma 2 27B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.2 vs 28.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

### Is Gemma 2 27B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.9 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 8K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.