Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 27B vs Step 3.5 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 35 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Gemma 3 27B Replace Step 3.5 Flash
Gemma 3 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
4.9
Output $/M
$0.30
0
Step 3.5 FlashStepFun
Coding
No data
Overall
17.0
Output $/M
$0.30
35
vs boards won of 35 shared

Decision reading

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

Gemma 3 27B has the edge where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model AGemma 3 27BGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BStep 3.5 FlashStepFunNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
35
Gemma 3 27B only
27
Step 3.5 Flash only
0
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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, Step 3.5 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 83.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 3 27B 10.5% against Step 3.5 Flash 94.4%, 83.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Both cost $0.30 per million output tokens.
Context window
Gemma 3 27B takes 131K tokens, Step 3.5 Flash 262K.

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 27BBarsStep 3.5 FlashTies
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge04
General019
All shared boards035
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
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%32.6%Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: coding13221436Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT13541434Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index4.917.0Step 3.5 Flash
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 Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Agentic Index0.1Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.5%94.4%Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.8%83.1%Step 3.5 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.4%24.5%Step 3.5 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13401411Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: expert13041421Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13531421Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Vision: diagrams1156Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Vision: homework1160Not 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 index02
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
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: math13121408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work13271421Step 3.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)66.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
GeoBench52.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: science13831415Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13911408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government13751408Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance13601394Step 3.5 Flash
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 Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 27B and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
IFBench31.8%66.5%Step 3.5 Flash
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)7.3%63.0%Step 3.5 Flash
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 Text13581403Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following13211385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing13451357Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Vision1165Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 27B measured
LMArena Text: English13771417Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: non-English13341385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese13461446Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: German13621405Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese12871353Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Korean13081351Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: French13681421Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Spanish13491419Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Russian13491385Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish13451389Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn13451404Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries13331402Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language13471372Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13201360Step 3.5 Flash
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 Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGemma 3 27BStep 3.5 FlashLeader
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
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.0049Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0059Fits in one request

Gemma 3 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 27B$0.019Exceeds the context window
Step 3.5 Flash$0.023Fits 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 Step 3.5 Flash
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 27BStepFun Step 3.5 Flash
MakerGoogleStepFun
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 12, 2025January 29, 2026
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.08$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.30$0.30
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than Step 3.5 Flash for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Gemma 3 27B has the edge where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Gemma 3 27B costs $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 27B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 27B vs Step 3.5 Flash comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 3 27B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Step 3.5 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next