Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 2 27B vs Mistral Medium 3.5

Gemma 2 27B costs 11.5x less per output token than Mistral Medium 3.5 ($0.65 vs $7.50 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 30 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 2 27B Replace Mistral Medium 3.5
Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
0
Mistral Medium 3.5Mistral AI
Coding
25.5
Overall
37.3
Output $/M
$7.50
30
vs boards won of 30 shared

Gemma 2 27B or Mistral Medium 3.5: which to pick

Only Mistral Medium 3.5 has a coding score, 25.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 2 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 2 27B for output tokens 11.5x cheaper ($0.65 vs $7.50 per million).

Model AGemma 2 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMistral Medium 3.5Mistral AI25.5/1003 independent benchmarks$6.02 per solved task
Shared results
30
Gemma 2 27B only
6
Mistral Medium 3.5 only
51
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, Mistral Medium 3.5 25.5 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 41.0 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: expert: Gemma 2 27B 1171 against Mistral Medium 3.5 1432, 43.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against Mistral Medium 3.5 $7.50 per million output tokens, 11.5x apart.
Context window
Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, Mistral Medium 3.5 262K.

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 27BBarsMistral Medium 3.5Ties
Coding02
Intelligence01
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General018
All shared boards030
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1264Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured46.9Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured66.4%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.9%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured5.1%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured39.0%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
SciCodeNot measured40.2%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured33.3%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured764.0Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding12111460Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: software and IT12281458Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1254Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1308Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured14.2Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index122.1141.4Mistral Medium 3.5
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured7.0Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured32.1%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured4.5%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured9.1%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured11.2%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured94.2%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured34.9%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured74.8%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured13.8%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)36.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11981436Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: expert11711432Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12061445Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1254Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1230Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured41.4%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
OTIS Mock AIME1.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
ProofBenchNot measured9.0%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
MATH level 527.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: math12121431Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work12211440Mistral Medium 3.5
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured75.3%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)68.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured44.2%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured58.8%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured68.0%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured28.9%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured33.8%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
MMLU75.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: science12281428Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11981409Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: legal and government12411437Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: business and finance12081426Mistral Medium 3.5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1142Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1079Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1079Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1120Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1061Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1121Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured950Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1063Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index018
General benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured37.6%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured67.7%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured34.8%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
IFBenchNot measured68.8%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured69.3%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
DTBench48.0%75.5%Mistral Medium 3.5
LMCA7.1%26.1%Mistral Medium 3.5
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured26.9%Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Text12311421Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: instruction following12061415Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: creative writing12401374Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena VisionNot measured1222Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Text: English12421433Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: non-English12171404Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: Chinese12211444Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: German12091453Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: Japanese1175Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: Korean11741384Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: French12481448Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: Spanish12281411Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: Russian12341395Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: Polish12771430Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn12241423Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: longer queries12301415Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: writing and language12491384Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12121382Mistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1240Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1244Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1233Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1216Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1198Only Mistral Medium 3.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 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 Mistral Medium 3.5
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5Leader
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
Mistral Medium 3.5$0.0053Fits in one request

Gemma 2 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.034Exceeds the context window
Mistral Medium 3.5$0.098Fits in one request

Gemma 2 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.137Exceeds the context window
Mistral Medium 3.5$0.375Fits 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 Mistral Medium 3.5
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 2 27BMistral Medium 3.5
MakerGoogleMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 13, 2024April 30, 2026
Context window8K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.65$1.50
Output $/Mtok$0.65$7.50
Coding indexNot benchmarked25.5
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$6.02
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Mistral Medium 3.5 for coding?

Only Mistral Medium 3.5 has a coding score, 25.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 2 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 2 27B for output tokens 11.5x cheaper ($0.65 vs $7.50 per million).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Mistral Medium 3.5?

Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.5 costs $1.50 and $7.50. Cost per solved task is known for Mistral Medium 3.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or Mistral Medium 3.5?

Mistral Medium 3.5, with 262K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 2 27B vs Mistral Medium 3.5 comparison based on?

30 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 2 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Mistral Medium 3.5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next