Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 2 27B vs o3

Updated October 21, 2026. 35 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
0
o3OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
20.2
Output $/M
$8.00
35
vs boards won of 35 shared

Decision reading

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

Gemma 2 27B has the edge where output tokens cost 12.3x less, and where what matters is LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Shared results
35
Gemma 2 27B only
1
o3 only
62
Like-for-like categories
6 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked, o3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 55.6 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: Gemma 2 27B 1.4% against o3 84.4%, 83.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against o3 $8.00 per million output tokens, 12.3x apart.
Context window
Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, o3 200K.

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 27BBarso3Ties
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 o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured81.3%Only o3 measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured58.4%Only o3 measured
SWE-bench MultimodalNot measured36.0%Only o3 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.9%Only o3 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.8%Only o3 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured37.1%Only o3 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured8.8%Only o3 measured
WeirdMLNot measured52.4%Only o3 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured933.5Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: coding12111407o3
LMArena Text: software and IT12281415o3
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured20.2Only o3 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index122.1146.7o3
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured80.7%Only o3 measured
METR time horizonsNot measured65.4%Only o3 measured
GDPvalNot measured30.8%Only o3 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured45.2%Only o3 measured
OSWorldNot measured23.0%Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured84.1%Only o3 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured80.4%Only o3 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured82.7%Only o3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured20.1%Only o3 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)36.5%81.8%o3
ARC-AGINot measured60.8%Only o3 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured6.5%Only o3 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured53.1%Only o3 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured37.0%Only o3 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured29.0%Only o3 measured
VPCTNot measured52.0%Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11981402o3
LMArena Text: expert11711402o3
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12061411o3
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1220Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1234Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
AIMENot measured85.3%Only o3 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured94.6%Only o3 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured91.8%Only o3 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured88.3Only o3 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured88.3%Only o3 measured
OTIS Mock AIME1.4%84.4%o3
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured33.3%Only o3 measured
MATH level 527.9%97.8%o3
LMArena Text: math12121426o3
LMArena Text: mathematical work12211423o3
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 o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
MMLU ProNot measured85.6%Only o3 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)68.0%83.8%o3
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured59.7%Only o3 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.6%Only o3 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured65.7%Only o3 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.1%Only o3 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured47.3%Only o3 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured85.3%Only o3 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured49.4%Only o3 measured
MMLU75.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
GeoBenchNot measured74.0%Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: science12281429o3
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11981448o3
LMArena Text: legal and government12411428o3
LMArena Text: business and finance12081393o3
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1036Only o3 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1017Only o3 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1034Only o3 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1200Only o3 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1020Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured41.8%Only o3 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured76.7%Only o3 measured
IFBenchNot measured71.4%Only o3 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured74.7%Only o3 measured
DTBench48.0%84.8%o3
LMCA7.1%39.7%o3
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured88.9%Only o3 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured83.9%Only o3 measured
CL-benchNot measured17.8%Only o3 measured
LMArena Text12311410o3
LMArena Text: instruction following12061368o3
LMArena Text: creative writing12401359o3
LMArena VisionNot measured1214Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: English12421417o3
LMArena Text: non-English12171401o3
LMArena Text: Chinese12211437o3
LMArena Text: German12091420o3
LMArena Text: Japanese11751403o3
LMArena Text: Korean11741370o3
LMArena Text: French12481430o3
LMArena Text: Spanish12281395o3
LMArena Text: Russian12341406o3
LMArena Text: Polish12771438o3
LMArena Text: multi-turn12241405o3
LMArena Text: longer queries12301372o3
LMArena Text: writing and language12491372o3
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12121373o3
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1221Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1237Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1218Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1222Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1210Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1234Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1201Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 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 o3
BenchmarkGemma 2 27Bo3Leader
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
o3$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
o3$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
o3$0.480Exceeds the context window

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 o3
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 2 27BOpenAI o3
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 13, 2024April 16, 2025
Context window8K200K
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$0.571
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than o3 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Gemma 2 27B has the edge where output tokens cost 12.3x less, and where what matters is LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or o3?

Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; o3 costs $2.00 and $8.00. Cost per solved task is known for o3 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or o3?

o3, with 200K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 2 27B vs o3 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 o3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next