Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 12B vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.6 27B leads Gemma 3 12B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.4 to 3.8, and Gemma 3 12B costs 16.6x less per output token ($0.1625 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 3 12BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
28.0
Output $/M
$0.1625
0
Qwen3.6 27BQwen
Coding
36.8
Overall
45.3
Output $/M
$2.70
15
vs boards won of 15 shared

Gemma 3 12B or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 12B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 16.6x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $2.70 per million).

Shared results
15
Gemma 3 12B only
28
Qwen3.6 27B only
9
Like-for-like categories
6 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 3 12B not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 74.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 3 12B 10.8% against Qwen3.6 27B 94.2%, 83.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 12B $0.1625 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 16.6x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 12B takes 131K tokens, Qwen3.6 27B 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 3 12BBarsQwen3.6 27BTies
Coding03
Intelligence02
Agentic work02
Reasoning03
Math01
General04
All shared boards015
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Coding Index5.853.7Qwen3.6 27B
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured70.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured11.9%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
SciCode16.4%42.8%Qwen3.6 27B
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%34.8%Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Text: coding1281Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1313Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index3.821.4Qwen3.6 27B
Epoch Capabilities Index123.5146.2Qwen3.6 27B
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Agentic Index0.118.5Qwen3.6 27B
τ²-Bench Telecom10.8%94.2%Qwen3.6 27B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)30.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B 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 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)34.9%84.2%Qwen3.6 27B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%23.1%Qwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)39.5%85.9%Qwen3.6 27B
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured7.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1309Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: expert1248Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1318Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Math Index18.3Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)18.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
OTIS Mock AIME16.7%91.1%Qwen3.6 27B
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured35.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LMArena Text: math1307Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1336Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured62.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)59.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: science1366Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1334Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1381Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1376Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
IFBench36.7%67.6%Qwen3.6 27B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)8.3%77.3%Qwen3.6 27B
DTBench48.8%78.1%Qwen3.6 27B
LMCA4.5%34.5%Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Text1334Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1299Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1331Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: English1349Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1318Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: German1370Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1335Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1334Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1317Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1307Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1297Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27BLeader
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 3 12B$0.0002Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.0018Fits in one request

Gemma 3 12B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.0042Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.031Fits in one request

Gemma 3 12B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.017Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.6 27B$0.117Fits in one request

Gemma 3 12B 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 3 12B and Qwen3.6 27B
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 12BQwen3.6 27B
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025April 27, 2026
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.1625$2.70
Coding indexNot benchmarked36.8
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.30
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 12B better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 12B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 16.6x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $2.70 per million).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 12B or Qwen3.6 27B?

Gemma 3 12B costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.1625 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 and $2.70. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 12B or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 12B vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 3 12B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next