Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct leads Gemma 3 27B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 7.7 to 4.9, and Gemma 3 27B costs 1.3x less per output token ($0.30 vs $0.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 43 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemma 3 27B Replace Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Gemma 3 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
31.4
Output $/M
$0.30
33
Qwen2.5 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
26.5
Output $/M
$0.40
10
vs boards won of 43 shared

Gemma 3 27B or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 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 1.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $0.40 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 33K tokens).

Model AGemma 3 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen2.5 72B InstructQwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
43
Gemma 3 27B only
23
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct only
10
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, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 24.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 3 27B 10.5% against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 34.5%, 24.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 27B $0.30 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.40 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 27B takes 131K tokens, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 33K.

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 27BBarsQwen2.5 72B InstructTies
Coding22
Intelligence11
Agentic work01
Reasoning42
Math60
Knowledge41
General163
All shared boards3310
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index22
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B 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%27.6%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
SciCode23.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%4.5%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
WeirdMLNot measured16.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding13221292Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: software and IT13541292Gemma 3 27B
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index4.97.7Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Epoch Capabilities Index130.0129.0Gemma 3 27B
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Agentic Index0.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.5%34.5%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
METR time horizonsNot measured35.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
BALROGNot measured16.2%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
TheAgentCompanyNot measured5.7%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)29.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index42
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.8%49.1%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.4%3.6%Gemma 3 27B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.7%49.1%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BIG-Bench HardNot measured79.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13401271Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: expert13041245Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13531279Gemma 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 12 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Math Index20.714.0Gemma 3 27B
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)20.7%14.0%Gemma 3 27B
OTIS Mock AIME22.5%8.1%Gemma 3 27B
MATH level 574.0%63.2%Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: math13121283Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: mathematical work13271290Gemma 3 27B
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)66.9%72.0%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
MMLUNot measured85.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
GeoBench52.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured94.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science13831275Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13911258Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: legal and government13751288Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: business and finance13601253Gemma 3 27B
FACTS Benchmark Suite29.1%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B 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 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index163
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
IFBench31.8%36.9%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)7.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
DTBench52.5%62.9%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
LMCA12.3%13.4%Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)79.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
HellaSwagNot measured84.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured82.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
PIQANot measured82.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text13581269Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: instruction following13211254Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: creative writing13451221Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Vision1165Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: English13771283Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: non-English13341252Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Chinese13461273Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: German13621234Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Japanese12871180Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Korean13081188Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: French13681280Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Spanish13491255Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Russian13491264Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: Polish1345Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13451272Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: longer queries13331281Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: writing and language13471247Gemma 3 27B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13201211Gemma 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 12 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 Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B 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
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.0006Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.0049Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.019Exceeds the context window

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.019Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.076Exceeds 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 Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 27BQwen2.5 72B Instruct
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 12, 2025September 19, 2024
Context window131K33K
Input $/Mtok$0.08$0.36
Output $/Mtok$0.30$0.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 27B for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $0.40 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 33K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B costs $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs $0.36 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 27B or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B, with 131K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct comparison based on?

43 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 3 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next