Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 27B vs GPT-5.1

GPT-5.1 leads Gemma 3 27B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.7 to 4.9, and Gemma 3 27B costs 33.3x less per output token ($0.30 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 56 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 3 27B Replace GPT-5.1
Gemma 3 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
31.4
Output $/M
$0.30
0
GPT-5.1OpenAI
Coding
40.4
Overall
55.0
Output $/M
$10.00
56
vs boards won of 56 shared

Gemma 3 27B or GPT-5.1: which to pick

Only GPT-5.1 has a coding score, 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 3 27B for output tokens 33.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $10.00 per million).

Model AGemma 3 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-5.1OpenAI40.4/1003 independent benchmarks$1.02 per solved task
Shared results
56
Gemma 3 27B only
10
GPT-5.1 only
45
Like-for-like categories
7 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, GPT-5.1 40.4 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 71.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run): Gemma 3 27B 20.7% against GPT-5.1 94.0%, 73.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 27B $0.30 against GPT-5.1 $10.00 per million output tokens, 33.3x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 27B takes 131K tokens, GPT-5.1 400K.

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 27BBarsGPT-5.1Ties
Coding05
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning08
Math05
Knowledge06
General029
All shared boards056
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
Aider polyglot4.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured66.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1396Only GPT-5.1 measured
AA Coding Index10.149.4GPT-5.1
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured86.5%Only GPT-5.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured69.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured24.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%86.8%GPT-5.1
SciCode23.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%45.5%GPT-5.1
Terminal-BenchNot measured47.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured13.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
WeirdMLNot measured60.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding13221453GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: software and IT13541454GPT-5.1
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1307Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1405Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1421Only GPT-5.1 measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index4.924.7GPT-5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index130.0149.8GPT-5.1
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
AA Agentic Index0.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.5%81.9%GPT-5.1
DeepResearch BenchNot measured42.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$1,473Only GPT-5.1 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)29.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured86.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured83.2%Only GPT-5.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.8%87.3%GPT-5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.4%28.5%GPT-5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.7%87.6%GPT-5.1
ARC-AGINot measured72.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured17.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured53.2%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured42.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured19.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
VPCTNot measured58.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13401457GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: expert13041470GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13531462GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: diagrams11561264GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: homework11601272GPT-5.1
Kagi LLM Benchmark35.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
AIMENot measured93.3%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured93.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
AA Math Index20.794.0GPT-5.1
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)20.7%94.0%GPT-5.1
OTIS Mock AIME22.5%88.6%GPT-5.1
MATH level 574.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: math13121446GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work13271449GPT-5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured85.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured73.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured63.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.9%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured61.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured52.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)66.9%87.0%GPT-5.1
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured48.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
GeoBench52.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: science13831459GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13911456GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: legal and government13751459GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: business and finance13601431GPT-5.1
FACTS Benchmark Suite29.1%45.0%GPT-5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 2 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 GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1187Only GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1163Only GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1178Only GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1204Only GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1060Only GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1170Only GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1149Only GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1119Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index029
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured43.2%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured88.1%Only GPT-5.1 measured
IFBench31.8%72.9%GPT-5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)7.3%80.0%GPT-5.1
DTBench52.5%90.1%GPT-5.1
LMCA12.3%43.9%GPT-5.1
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)79.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
CL-benchNot measured23.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured17.3%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text13581443GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: instruction following13211443GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: creative writing13451427GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision11651250GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: English13771451GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: non-English13341431GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: Chinese13461495GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: German13621438GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: Japanese12871453GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: Korean13081401GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: French13681450GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: Spanish13491433GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: Russian13491435GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: Polish13451440GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn13451450GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: longer queries13331448GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: writing and language13471428GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13201415GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: English11881252GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: Chinese11641270GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: reading text11561255GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: humor11661263GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: captioning11511252GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: recognizing things11961232GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: creative writing11771266GPT-5.1
LMArena DocumentNot measured1403Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 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 GPT-5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BGPT-5.1Leader
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
GPT-5.1$0.0063Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.0049Fits in one request
GPT-5.1$0.092Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.019Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.1$0.350Fits in one request

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 GPT-5.1
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 27BOpenAI GPT-5.1
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 12, 2025November 13, 2025
Context window131K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.08$1.25
Output $/Mtok$0.30$10.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked40.4
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.02
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than GPT-5.1 for coding?

Only GPT-5.1 has a coding score, 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 27B for output tokens 33.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $10.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or GPT-5.1?

Gemma 3 27B costs $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1 costs $1.25 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 27B or GPT-5.1?

GPT-5.1, with 400K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 27B vs GPT-5.1 comparison based on?

56 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 3 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.1's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next