Nova Lite 1.0 vs Gemma 2 27B
Updated October 21, 2026. 28 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Nova Lite 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 2.7x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 8K tokens.
- Shared results
- 28
- Nova Lite 1.0 only
- 13
- Gemma 2 27B only
- 8
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Nova Lite 1.0 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 6.7.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Nova Lite 1.0
Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0
Nova Lite 1.0 $0.0002, Gemma 2 27B $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Lite 1.0 not benchmarked, Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Reasoning, 4.0 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LMArena Text: creative writing: Nova Lite 1.0 1197 against Gemma 2 27B 1240, 7.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nova Lite 1.0 $0.24 against Gemma 2 27B $0.65 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens, Gemma 2 27B 8K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Nova Lite 1.0 | Bars | Gemma 2 27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 3 | 0 | ||
| Math | 2 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 4 | 1 | ||
| General | 4 | 12 | ||
| All shared boards | 15 | 13 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 16.7% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 0.8% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1239 | 1211 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1241 | 1228 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 6.7 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 122.1 | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 17.5% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 43.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 36.5% | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1220 | 1198 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1201 | 1171 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1226 | 1206 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 7.0 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 1.4% | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| MATH level 5 | Not measured | 27.9% | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1227 | 1212 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1235 | 1221 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.0% | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| MMLU | 77.0% | 75.7% | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: science | 1232 | 1228 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1213 | 1198 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1238 | 1241 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1219 | 1208 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index412
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 34.1% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 48.0% | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 7.1% | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1231 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1205 | 1206 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1197 | 1240 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Vision | 990 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1243 | 1242 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1208 | 1217 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1225 | 1221 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1229 | 1209 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1153 | 1175 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1153 | 1174 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: French | 1238 | 1248 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1226 | 1228 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1216 | 1234 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1277 | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1199 | 1224 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1234 | 1230 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1211 | 1249 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1176 | 1212 | Gemma 2 27B |
| LMArena Vision: English | 999 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Gemma 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Lite 1.0 | Google Gemma 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | December 5, 2024 | July 13, 2024 |
| Context window | 300K | 8K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.06 | $0.65 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.24 | $0.65 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Lite 1.0 better than Gemma 2 27B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Nova Lite 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 2.7x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 8K tokens.
Which is cheaper, Nova Lite 1.0 or Gemma 2 27B?
Nova Lite 1.0 costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.24 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 and $0.65. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Lite 1.0 or Gemma 2 27B?
Nova Lite 1.0, with 300K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Lite 1.0 vs Gemma 2 27B comparison based on?
28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Lite 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Gemma 2 27B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.