Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 2 27B vs Step 3.5 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 28 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Gemma 2 27B Replace Step 3.5 Flash
Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
0
Step 3.5 FlashStepFun
Coding
No data
Overall
17.0
Output $/M
$0.30
28
vs boards won of 28 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 what matters is LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Model AGemma 2 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BStep 3.5 FlashStepFunNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
28
Gemma 2 27B only
8
Step 3.5 Flash only
7
Like-for-like categories
5 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, Step 3.5 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 37.6 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: expert: Gemma 2 27B 1171 against Step 3.5 Flash 1421, 41.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against Step 3.5 Flash $0.30 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
Gemma 2 27B takes 8K tokens, Step 3.5 Flash 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 27BBarsStep 3.5 FlashTies
Coding02
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General017
All shared boards028
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured32.6%Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding12111436Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT12281434Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured17.0Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
Epoch Capabilities Index122.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured94.4%Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.1%Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured24.5%Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)36.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11981411Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: expert11711421Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12061421Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
OTIS Mock AIME1.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
MATH level 527.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: math12121408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work12211421Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
LegalBench (Vals AI)68.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
MMLU75.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: science12281415Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11981408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government12411408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance12081394Step 3.5 Flash
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 Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index017
General benchmarks for Gemma 2 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
IFBenchNot measured66.5%Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured63.0%Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
DTBench48.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMCA7.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text12311403Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following12061385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing12401357Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: English12421417Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: non-English12171385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese12211446Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: German12091405Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese11751353Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Korean11741351Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: French12481421Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Spanish12281419Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Russian12341385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish12771389Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn12241404Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries12301402Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language12491372Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12121360Step 3.5 Flash
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 Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
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
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.034Exceeds the context window
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0059Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 2 27B$0.137Exceeds the context window
Step 3.5 Flash$0.023Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash 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 Step 3.5 Flash
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 2 27BStepFun Step 3.5 Flash
MakerGoogleStepFun
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 13, 2024January 29, 2026
Context window8K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.65$0.10
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 Step 3.5 Flash for coding?

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

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 2 27B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash, with 262K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 2 27B vs Step 3.5 Flash comparison based on?

28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 2 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Step 3.5 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next