# Gemma 3 27B vs Grok 4.7

> Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3-27b-vs-grok-4-7
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 24

## Summary

- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.7 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.7 leads 62.8 to 25.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B and 98.1% for Grok 4.7.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 53.1 |
| Rank | 284 | 37 |
| Context | 131K | 500K |
| Input $/M | $0.08 | $2 |
| Output $/M | $0.16 | $6 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)
- Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 21.2% | 57.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1427 |
| FrontierCode | — | 47.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| CursorBench | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1639 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 29.5% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)
- Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 54.6% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 22.8% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 10,537 |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)
- Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 18% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 38% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1413 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 96% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 49.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 153.53 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 76.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 29% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)
- Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | 98.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 53% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 17.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 34% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)
- Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 92.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | 1422 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 56% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)
- Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1228 |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 32.5% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20.8% |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)
- Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1389 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | 1455 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1455 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1397 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | 1400 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)
- Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1404 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)
- Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1413 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)
- Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1399 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1391 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | 2007 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | 1393 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3 27B better than Grok 4.7?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.7?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

### Is Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.7 better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Grok 4.7 share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 39.