Model Comparison

DeepSeek VL2 Small vs Gemma 3 27B

DeepSeek VL2 Small significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

5 benchmarks

DeepSeek VL2 Small outperforms in 4 benchmarks (ChartQA, DocVQA, InfoVQA, TextVQA), while Gemma 3 27B is better at 1 benchmark (AI2D).

DeepSeek VL2 Small significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun May 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

11.0B diff

Gemma 3 27B has 11.0B more parameters than DeepSeek VL2 Small, making it 68.8% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Small
16.0Bparameters
Google
Gemma 3 27B
27.0Bparameters
16.0B
DeepSeek VL2 Small
27.0B
Gemma 3 27B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Gemma 3 27B specifies input context (131,072 tokens). Only Gemma 3 27B specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Small
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Google
Gemma 3 27B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Sun May 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both DeepSeek VL2 Small and Gemma 3 27B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

DeepSeek VL2 Small

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 3 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek VL2 Small is licensed under deepseek, while Gemma 3 27B uses Gemma.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

DeepSeek VL2 Small

deepseek

Open weights

Gemma 3 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek VL2 Small was released on 2024-12-13, while Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12.

Gemma 3 27B is 3 months newer than DeepSeek VL2 Small.

DeepSeek VL2 Small

Dec 13, 2024

1.4 years ago

Gemma 3 27B

Mar 12, 2025

1.2 years ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

DeepSeek
Higher ChartQA score (84.5% vs 78.0%)
Higher DocVQA score (92.3% vs 86.6%)
Higher InfoVQA score (75.8% vs 70.6%)
Higher TextVQA score (83.4% vs 65.1%)
Google
Larger context window (131,072 tokens)
Higher AI2D score (84.5% vs 80.0%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Small
Google
Gemma 3 27B

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek VL2 Small vs Gemma 3 27B.

Which is better, DeepSeek VL2 Small or Gemma 3 27B?

DeepSeek VL2 Small significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. DeepSeek VL2 Small is made by DeepSeek and Gemma 3 27B is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does DeepSeek VL2 Small compare to Gemma 3 27B in benchmarks?

DeepSeek VL2 Small scores DocVQA: 92.3%, ChartQA: 84.5%, OCRBench: 83.4%, TextVQA: 83.4%, MMBench: 80.3%. Gemma 3 27B scores GSM8k: 95.9%, IFEval: 90.4%, MATH: 89.0%, HumanEval: 87.8%, BIG-Bench Hard: 87.6%.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek VL2 Small and Gemma 3 27B?

DeepSeek VL2 Small supports an unknown number of tokens and Gemma 3 27B supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between DeepSeek VL2 Small and Gemma 3 27B?

Key differences include licensing (deepseek vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek VL2 Small and Gemma 3 27B?

DeepSeek VL2 Small is developed by DeepSeek and Gemma 3 27B is developed by Google.