Gemma 2 27B vs GPT-4o
Gemma 2 27B costs 15.4x less per output token than GPT-4o ($0.65 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemma 2 27B or GPT-4o: 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 15.4x cheaper ($0.65 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by MMLU or DTBench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 3
- Gemma 2 27B only
- 33
- GPT-4o only
- 24
- Like-for-like categories
- 2 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GPT-4o has a Design Arena: websites result, 831.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-4o
GPT-4o takes 128K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemma 2 27B
Gemma 2 27B $0.0010, GPT-4o $0.0075 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked, GPT-4o not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 13.0 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- DTBench: Gemma 2 27B 48.0% against GPT-4o 64.5%, 16.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against GPT-4o $10.00 per million output tokens, 15.4x apart.
- Context window
- Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, GPT-4o 128K.
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 | Gemma 2 27B | Bars | GPT-4o | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 3 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 38.8% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| SWE-bench Lite | Not measured | 38.0% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| SWE-bench (full test set) | Not measured | 18.8% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal | Not measured | 30.4% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 30.9% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 8.3% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1211 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1228 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 1.5% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.1 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 25.1% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| GDPval | Not measured | 9.9% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 54.3% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 2.4% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 36.5% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| ARC-AGI | Not measured | 4.5% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 0.0% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1198 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1171 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1206 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 6.0 | Only GPT-4o measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 6.0% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 1.4% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| MATH level 5 | 27.9% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1212 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1221 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 68.0% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 74.8% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| MMLU | 75.7% | 88.1% | GPT-4o |
| LMArena Text: science | 1228 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1198 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1241 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1208 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 831 | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 885 | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 906 | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 858 | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 869 | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 861 | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 34.3% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 49.3% | Only GPT-4o measured |
| DTBench | 48.0% | 64.5% | GPT-4o |
| LMCA | 7.1% | 16.6% | GPT-4o |
| LMArena Text | 1231 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1206 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1240 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1242 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1217 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1221 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1209 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1175 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1174 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1248 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1228 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1234 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1277 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1224 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1230 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1249 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1212 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | GPT-4o | 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
Gemma 2 27B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Gemma 2 27B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Google Gemma 2 27B | OpenAI GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | July 13, 2024 | May 13, 2024 |
| Context window | 8K | 128K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.65 | $2.50 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.65 | $10.00 |
| 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 Gemma 2 27B better than GPT-4o for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 2 27B for output tokens 15.4x cheaper ($0.65 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by MMLU or DTBench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or GPT-4o?
Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; GPT-4o costs $2.50 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or GPT-4o?
GPT-4o, with 128K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemma 2 27B vs GPT-4o comparison based on?
3 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-4o's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.