Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 2 27B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 4.4x less per output token than Gemma 2 27B ($0.147 vs $0.65 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
Nemotron 3.5 LightningNVIDIA
Coding
22.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.147
vs $0.65 vs $0.147 per 1M output tokens. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is 4.4x cheaper.

Gemma 2 27B or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: which to pick

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 2 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemma 2 27B has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning on AA Coding Index, SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) and Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI). Compare them on price and context instead.

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, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 per million output tokens, 4.4x apart.
Context window
Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured26.8Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured3.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured10.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured29.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
SciCodeNot measured32.1%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
ALE-BenchNot measured769.2Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
LMArena Text: coding1211Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1228Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured12.9Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Epoch Capabilities Index122.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured3.5Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured18.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.6%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured17.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured74.3%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured10.6%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)36.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1198Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: expert1171Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1206Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
OTIS Mock AIME1.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
MATH level 527.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: math1212Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1221Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
LegalBench (Vals AI)68.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured54.2%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
MMLU75.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: science1228Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1198Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1241Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1208Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21 boards measured
General benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured4.3%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured60.3%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
DTBench48.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMCA7.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text1231Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1206Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1240Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: English1242Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1217Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1221Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: German1209Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1175Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: Korean1174Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: French1248Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1228Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1234Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: Polish1277Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1224Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1230Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1249Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1212Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 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
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0001Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.034Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0031Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.137Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.012Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 2 27BNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
MakerGoogleNVIDIA
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 13, 2024August 11, 2026
Context window8K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.65$0.0534
Output $/Mtok$0.65$0.147
Coding indexNot benchmarked22.6
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.06
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning for coding?

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 2 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 and $0.147. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, with 262K tokens against 8K.

Has any benchmark tested both Gemma 2 27B and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemma 2 27B has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning on AA Coding Index, SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) and Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next