# Gemma 3 27B vs o1

> o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 263× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3-27b-vs-o1
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 37

## Summary

- They share 37 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 1 category and o1 in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where o1 leads 46.1 to 22.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 4.9% for Gemma 3 27B and 61.7% for o1.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- o1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 40.9 |
| Rank | 284 | 143 |
| Context | 131K | 200K |
| Input $/M | $0.08 | $15 |
| Output $/M | $0.16 | $60 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)
- o1: 46.1 (#70)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | 61.7% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | 69.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1367 |
| SciCode | 21.2% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 47.6% |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)
- o1: 24.6 (#117)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)
- o1: 27.9 (#111)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 15% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | 91.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1371 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 74.7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | 65.5% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 141.91 |
| LiveBench | 50% | 75.7% |
| SimpleBench | — | 41.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 30.7% |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |

## Math

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)
- o1: 36.1 (#175)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | 73.3% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | 80.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1388 |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 14.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 9.3% |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)
- o1: 41.5 (#110)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 76.8% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | 11.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | 1361 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)
- o1: 34.2 (#93)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1168 |
| GeoBench | 52% | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)
- o1: 48.6 (#142)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | 1394 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1344 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | 1345 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)
- o1: 74.8 (#86)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | 81.5% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1367 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)
- o1: 50.3 (#9)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1378 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)
- o1: 55.6 (#144)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1348 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | 70.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | 65.4% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3 27B better than o1?

o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 263× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or o1?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.

### Is Gemma 3 27B or o1 better for coding?

o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

o1 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and o1 share?

37 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.