Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 2 27B vs GPT-4.1

Gemma 2 27B costs 12.3x less per output token than GPT-4.1 ($0.65 vs $8.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 2 27B Replace GPT-4.1
Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
0
GPT-4.1OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
36.5
Output $/M
$8.00
35
vs boards won of 35 shared

Gemma 2 27B or GPT-4.1: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 2 27B for output tokens 12.3x cheaper ($0.65 vs $8.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Model AGemma 2 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-4.1OpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmark$0.37 per solved task
Shared results
35
Gemma 2 27B only
1
GPT-4.1 only
57
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked, GPT-4.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 35.3 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
MATH level 5: Gemma 2 27B 27.9% against GPT-4.1 83.0%, 55.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against GPT-4.1 $8.00 per million output tokens, 12.3x apart.
Context window
Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, GPT-4.1 1.05M.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemma 2 27BBarsGPT-4.1Ties
Coding02
Intelligence01
Reasoning04
Math04
Knowledge05
General019
All shared boards035
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured52.4%Only GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured39.6%Only GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench MultimodalNot measured31.1%Only GPT-4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured54.7%Only GPT-4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured45.7%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured13.6%Only GPT-4.1 measured
WeirdMLNot measured39.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured558.1Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding12111390GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT12281391GPT-4.1
SciCodeNot measured4.6%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured12.7Only GPT-4.1 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index122.1136.7GPT-4.1
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured47.1%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured54.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
BrowseComp-PlusNot measured36.4%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured65.4%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured72.4%Only GPT-4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured66.6%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.2%Only GPT-4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)36.5%66.9%GPT-4.1
ARC-AGINot measured5.5%Only GPT-4.1 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.4%Only GPT-4.1 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured27.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured3.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11981384GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: expert11711364GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12061393GPT-4.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1215Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1248Only GPT-4.1 measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured52.3%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
AIMENot measured39.6%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured87.2%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured87.7%Only GPT-4.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured34.7Only GPT-4.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.7%Only GPT-4.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME1.4%38.3%GPT-4.1
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured6.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MATH level 527.9%83.0%GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: math12121369GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work12211360GPT-4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured80.5%Only GPT-4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)68.0%83.1%GPT-4.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured69.9%Only GPT-4.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured63.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured75.1%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured65.9%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured91.2%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.6%Only GPT-4.1 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured31.1%Only GPT-4.1 measured
MMLU75.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
GeoBenchNot measured72.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: science12281382GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11981379GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: legal and government12411399GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: business and finance12081369GPT-4.1
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured45.8%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1039Only GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1000Only GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1080Only GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1104Only GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured850Only GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1026Only GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
IFBenchNot measured43.0%Only GPT-4.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured68.3%Only GPT-4.1 measured
DTBench48.0%68.3%GPT-4.1
LMCA7.1%25.6%GPT-4.1
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured63.9%Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text12311383GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: instruction following12061367GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing12401363GPT-4.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1210Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: English12421392GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: non-English12171370GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: Chinese12211382GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: German12091381GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: Japanese11751319GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: Korean11741338GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: French12481382GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: Spanish12281376GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: Russian12341377GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: Polish12771389GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn12241397GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries12301385GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language12491371GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12121365GPT-4.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1209Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1226Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1218Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1196Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1207Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1208Only GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1210Only GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BGPT-4.1Leader
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

Gemma 2 27B$0.0010Fits in one request
GPT-4.1$0.0060Fits in one request

Gemma 2 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.034Exceeds the context window
GPT-4.1$0.124Fits in one request

Gemma 2 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.137Exceeds the context window
GPT-4.1$0.480Fits in one request

Gemma 2 27B 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.

Specifications of Gemma 2 27B and GPT-4.1
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 2 27BOpenAI GPT-4.1
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 13, 2024April 14, 2025
Context window8K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.65$2.00
Output $/Mtok$0.65$8.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.37
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than GPT-4.1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 2 27B for output tokens 12.3x cheaper ($0.65 vs $8.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or GPT-4.1?

Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; GPT-4.1 costs $2.00 and $8.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-4.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1, with 1.05M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 2 27B vs GPT-4.1 comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 2 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-4.1's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next