Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 costs 2.2x less per output token than Gemma 2 27B ($0.30 vs $0.65 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 32 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
0
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
41.5
Output $/M
$0.30
32
vs boards won of 32 shared

Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507: which to pick

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

Pick Gemma 2 27B for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Shared results
32
Gemma 2 27B only
4
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 only
13
Like-for-like categories
5 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, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 41.0 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: Gemma 2 27B 1.4% against Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 62.2%, 60.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 $0.30 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 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 27BBarsQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Ties
Coding02
Reasoning04
Math03
Knowledge04
General019
All shared boards032
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured70.7%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
SciCodeNot measured33.0%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured6.1%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: coding12111416Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: software and IT12281417Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured7.5Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index122.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured28.1%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured41.4%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured70.7%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured10.3%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)36.5%55.6%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: hard prompts11981398Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: expert11711397Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12061406Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured66.3Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured66.3%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
OTIS Mock AIME1.4%62.2%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
MATH level 527.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: math12121394Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: mathematical work12211411Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
LegalBench (Vals AI)68.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.5%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
MMLU75.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: science12281393Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11981392Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: legal and government12411387Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: business and finance12081389Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
IFBenchNot measured50.7%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured61.3%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
DTBench48.0%67.2%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMCA7.1%22.4%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text12311384Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: instruction following12061363Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: creative writing12401317Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: English12421391Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: non-English12171372Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: Chinese12211432Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: German12091379Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: Japanese11751337Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: Korean11741330Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: French12481419Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: Spanish12281404Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: Russian12341369Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: Polish12771353Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: multi-turn12241378Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: longer queries12301378Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: writing and language12491336Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12121334Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 25 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 Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
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
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.034Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507$0.0054Fits in one request

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.137Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507$0.021Fits in one request

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 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 Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 2 27BQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 13, 2024July 29, 2025
Context window8K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.65$0.09
Output $/Mtok$0.65$0.30
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 2 27B for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507?

Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 costs $0.09 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507?

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507, with 262K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 comparison based on?

32 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 2 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next