Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 3.2 1B Instruct

Gemma 3 27B leads Llama 3.2 1B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 4.9 to 4.8, and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs 1.5x less per output token ($0.201 vs $0.30 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 37 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 3 27B Replace Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Gemma 3 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
31.4
Output $/M
$0.30
36
Llama 3.2 1B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
9.6
Output $/M
$0.201
1
vs boards won of 37 shared

Gemma 3 27B or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct: which to pick

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

Pick Gemma 3 27B for a larger context window (131K against 60K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Model AGemma 3 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BLlama 3.2 1B InstructMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
37
Gemma 3 27B only
29
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct only
1
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, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 55.2 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare: Gemma 3 27B 1391 against Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 1009, 63.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 27B $0.30 against Llama 3.2 1B Instruct $0.201 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 27B takes 131K tokens, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 60K.

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 27BBarsLlama 3.2 1B InstructTies
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work20
Reasoning51
Math50
Knowledge50
General140
All shared boards361
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
Aider polyglot4.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
AA Coding Index10.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%1.9%Gemma 3 27B
SciCode23.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%0.0%Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: coding13221070Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: software and IT13541056Gemma 3 27B
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index4.94.8Gemma 3 27B
Epoch Capabilities Index130.0Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
AA Agentic Index0.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.5%0.0%Gemma 3 27B
BALROGNot measured6.6%Only Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)29.5%10.8%Gemma 3 27B
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index51
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.8%19.6%Gemma 3 27B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.4%5.5%Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.7%23.9%Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: hard prompts13401044Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: expert13041007Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13531087Gemma 3 27B
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 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
AA Math Index20.70.0Gemma 3 27B
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)20.7%0.0%Gemma 3 27B
OTIS Mock AIME22.5%0.6%Gemma 3 27B
MATH level 574.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: math13121086Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: mathematical work13271098Gemma 3 27B
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)66.9%20.0%Gemma 3 27B
GeoBench52.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: science13831055Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13911009Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: legal and government13751071Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: business and finance13601000Gemma 3 27B
FACTS Benchmark Suite29.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
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 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index140
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
IFBench31.8%22.8%Gemma 3 27B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)7.3%6.7%Gemma 3 27B
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 Text13581055Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: instruction following13211031Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: creative writing13451033Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Vision1165Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: English13771117Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: non-English1334973Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Chinese1346959Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: German13621014Gemma 3 27B
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: Russian1349941Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Polish1345Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13451030Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: longer queries13331050Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: writing and language13471030Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13201025Gemma 3 27B
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 15 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 Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BLlama 3.2 1B InstructLeader
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
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.0049Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0020Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.019Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0074Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 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 Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 27BMeta Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
MakerGoogleMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 12, 2025September 25, 2024
Context window131K60K
Input $/Mtok$0.08$0.027
Output $/Mtok$0.30$0.201
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Llama 3.2 1B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 27B for a larger context window (131K against 60K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B costs $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs $0.027 and $0.201. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 27B or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B, with 131K tokens against 60K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 3.2 1B Instruct comparison based on?

37 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 3 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next