Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 27B vs MiniMax M2.5

MiniMax M2.5 leads Gemma 3 27B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 4.9, and Gemma 3 27B costs 4.0x less per output token ($0.30 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 37 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 3 27B Replace MiniMax M2.5
Gemma 3 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
31.4
Output $/M
$0.30
11
MiniMax M2.5MiniMax
Coding
37.2
Overall
37.3
Output $/M
$1.20
26
vs boards won of 37 shared

Gemma 3 27B or MiniMax M2.5: which to pick

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 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 4.0x cheaper ($0.30 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: science or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Model AGemma 3 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMiniMax M2.5MiniMax37.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.62 per solved task
Shared results
37
Gemma 3 27B only
29
MiniMax M2.5 only
34
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, MiniMax M2.5 37.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 84.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 3 27B 10.5% against MiniMax M2.5 95.3%, 84.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 27B $0.30 against MiniMax M2.5 $1.20 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 27B takes 131K tokens, MiniMax M2.5 205K.

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 27BBarsMiniMax M2.5Ties
Coding03
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning06
Math02
Knowledge40
General712
All shared boards1126
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
Aider polyglot4.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured75.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured68.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1386Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
AA Coding Index10.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 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%34.8%MiniMax M2.5
Terminal-BenchNot measured42.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured618.2Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding13221380MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: software and IT13541383MiniMax M2.5
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1374Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1414Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnANot measured10.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE Atlas: RefactoringNot measured19.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE Atlas: Test WritingNot measured18.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index4.922.8MiniMax M2.5
Epoch Capabilities Index130.0146.6MiniMax M2.5
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
AA Agentic Index0.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.5%95.3%MiniMax M2.5
Vending-Bench 2Not measured-$23Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)29.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured82.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.8%84.8%MiniMax M2.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.4%20.5%MiniMax M2.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
ARC-AGINot measured63.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured4.9%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13401372MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: expert13041378MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13531384MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Vision: diagrams1156Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: homework1160Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark35.1%55.2%MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
AIMENot measured88.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
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
ProofBenchNot measured4.0%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
MATH level 574.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: math13121378MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work13271378MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured80.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.0%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured59.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured68.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured92.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)66.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
GeoBench52.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: science13831369Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13911357Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: legal and government13751366Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: business and finance13601356Gemma 3 27B
FACTS Benchmark Suite29.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1222Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1170Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1176Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1172Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1170Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1207Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1150Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index712
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
IFBench31.8%71.6%MiniMax M2.5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)7.3%73.3%MiniMax M2.5
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
CL-benchNot measured11.4%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured6.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text13581359MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: instruction following13211353MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: creative writing13451331Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Vision1165Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: English13771380MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: non-English13341338MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Chinese13461393MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: German13621361Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Japanese12871171Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Korean13081233Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: French13681363Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Spanish13491353MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Russian13491359MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Polish13451334Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: multi-turn13451364MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: longer queries13331366MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: writing and language13471345Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13201329MiniMax M2.5
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 MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5Leader
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
MiniMax M2.5$0.0009Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.0049Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.019Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.019Exceeds the context window
MiniMax M2.5$0.072Exceeds 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 MiniMax M2.5
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 27BMiniMax M2.5
MakerGoogleMiniMax
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 12, 2025February 12, 2026
Context window131K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.08$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.30$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarked37.2
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.62
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than MiniMax M2.5 for coding?

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 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 4.0x cheaper ($0.30 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: science or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or MiniMax M2.5?

Gemma 3 27B costs $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 27B or MiniMax M2.5?

MiniMax M2.5, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 27B vs MiniMax M2.5 comparison based on?

37 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 3 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2.5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next