# Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 3.1-70B

> Gemma 3 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3-27b-vs-llama-3-1-70b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 24

## Summary

- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemma 3 27B leads 52.5 to 35.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 74% for Gemma 3 27B and 36.7% for Llama 3.1-70B.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $0.40 for Llama 3.1-70B.
- Gemma 3 27B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 29.6 |
| Rank | 284 | 308 |
| Context | 131K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.08 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.16 | $0.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1260 |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| SciCode | 21.2% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 46.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.8% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 6.9% |
| BALROG | — | 27.9% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1241 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 60% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 14.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 125.92 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | 3.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1252 |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | 36.7% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 21% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 44.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | 1209 |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 42.6% |
| MMLU | — | 80.1% |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)
- Llama 3.1-70B: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1219 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | 1215 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1261 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | 1222 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1132 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1234 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | 1253 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1231 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
| IFEval | — | 82.1% |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1241 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)
- Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1261 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1232 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | 784 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | 1256 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| WildBench | — | 75.8% |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3 27B better than Llama 3.1-70B?

Gemma 3 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Llama 3.1-70B?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Llama 3.1-70B lists at $0.40 and $0.40.

### Is Gemma 3 27B or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?

Llama 3.1-70B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.3 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Gemma 3 27B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.1-70B share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.