Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 27B vs GLM 5 Turbo

GLM 5 Turbo leads Gemma 3 27B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.6 to 4.9, and Gemma 3 27B costs 13.3x less per output token ($0.30 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 3 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
31.4
Output $/M
$0.30
0
GLM 5 TurboZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$4.00
7
vs boards won of 7 shared

Gemma 3 27B or GLM 5 Turbo: which to pick

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

Pick Gemma 3 27B for output tokens 13.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $4.00 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
7
Gemma 3 27B only
59
GLM 5 Turbo only
9
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 3 27B not benchmarked, GLM 5 Turbo not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 88.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 3 27B 10.5% against GLM 5 Turbo 98.5%, 88.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 27B $0.30 against GLM 5 Turbo $4.00 per million output tokens, 13.3x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 27B takes 131K tokens, GLM 5 Turbo 203K.

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 27BBarsGLM 5 TurboTies
Coding01
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
General02
All shared boards07
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
Aider polyglot4.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
AA Coding Index10.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
SciCode23.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%33.3%GLM 5 Turbo
ALE-BenchNot measured634.0Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: coding1322Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1354Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
AA Intelligence Index4.926.6GLM 5 Turbo
Epoch Capabilities Index130.0Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
AA Agentic Index0.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.5%98.5%GLM 5 Turbo
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)29.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.8%84.7%GLM 5 Turbo
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.4%27.8%GLM 5 Turbo
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1340Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: expert1304Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1353Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1156Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: homework1160Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark35.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
AA Math Index20.7Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)20.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
OTIS Mock AIME22.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
MATH level 574.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: math1312Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1327Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)66.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
GeoBench52.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: science1383Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1391Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1375Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1360Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite29.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1262Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1260Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1248Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1264Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1247Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1261Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1205Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1160Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
IFBench31.8%73.2%GLM 5 Turbo
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)7.3%71.7%GLM 5 Turbo
DTBench52.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMCA12.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)79.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text1358Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1321Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1345Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision1165Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: English1377Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1334Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1346Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: German1362Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1287Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: Korean1308Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: French1368Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1349Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1349Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: Polish1345Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1345Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1333Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1347Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1320Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: English1188Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1164Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1156Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: humor1166Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1151Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1196Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1177Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGLM 5 TurboLeader
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 27B$0.0002Fits in one request
GLM 5 Turbo$0.0032Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.0049Fits in one request
GLM 5 Turbo$0.072Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.019Exceeds the context window
GLM 5 Turbo$0.280Exceeds the context window

Gemma 3 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.

Specifications of Gemma 3 27B and GLM 5 Turbo
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 27BZ.ai GLM 5 Turbo
MakerGoogleZ.ai
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 12, 2025March 15, 2026
Context window131K203K
Input $/Mtok$0.08$1.20
Output $/Mtok$0.30$4.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than GLM 5 Turbo for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 27B for output tokens 13.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $4.00 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or GLM 5 Turbo?

Gemma 3 27B costs $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; GLM 5 Turbo costs $1.20 and $4.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 27B or GLM 5 Turbo?

GLM 5 Turbo, with 203K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 27B vs GLM 5 Turbo comparison based on?

7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 3 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 5 Turbo's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next