Gemma 2 27B vs Sonar
Updated October 21, 2026. No benchmark has tested both models yet. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.65
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 7.7
- Output $/M
- $1.00
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 1.5x less.
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemma 2 27B has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index; Sonar on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), AA Intelligence Index and GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run). 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Sonar has a AA Intelligence Index result, 7.7.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Sonar
Sonar takes 127K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemma 2 27B
Gemma 2 27B $0.0010, Sonar $0.0015 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked, Sonar not benchmarked.
- 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 Sonar $1.00 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
- Context window
- Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, Sonar 127K.
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 Index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Sonar | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 29.5% | Only Sonar 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 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Sonar | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 7.7 | Only Sonar measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.1 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Sonar | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 47.1% | Only Sonar measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 4.9% | Only Sonar measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 36.5% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B 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 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Sonar | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Sonar | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 68.0% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 68.9% | Only Sonar measured |
| MMLU | 75.7% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| 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 10 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Sonar | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 48.0% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMCA | 7.1% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| 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 27 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 | Perplexity Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Perplexity | |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | July 13, 2024 | January 27, 2025 |
| Context window | 8K | 127K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.65 | $1.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.65 | $1.00 |
| 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 Sonar 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 1.5x less.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Sonar?
Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Sonar costs $1.00 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or Sonar?
Sonar, with 127K tokens against 8K.
Has any benchmark tested both Gemma 2 27B and Sonar?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemma 2 27B has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index; Sonar on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), AA Intelligence Index and GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.