Gemma 2 27B vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs 1.3x less per output token than Gemma 2 27B ($0.50 vs $0.65 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.65
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.50
Gemma 2 27B or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, 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; Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has none yet. 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
Long documents
Listed context window
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B takes 262K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Gemma 2 27B $0.0010, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B 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 Ternary Bonsai 2 27B $0.50 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
- Context window
- Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B 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 Index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 41 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.1 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | 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 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 68.0% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B 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 14 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | 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 29 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
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Ternary Bonsai 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 | PrismML Ternary Bonsai 2 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Prism-ml | |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | July 13, 2024 | September 18, 2026 |
| Context window | 8K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.65 | $0.075 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.65 | $0.50 |
| 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 Ternary Bonsai 2 27B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?
Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs $0.075 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B, with 262K tokens against 8K.
Has any benchmark tested both Gemma 2 27B and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemma 2 27B has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index; Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.