Model Comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Gemma 3n E2B

Gemma 2 27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

9 benchmarks

Gemma 2 27B outperforms in 9 benchmarks (ARC-C, ARC-E, BoolQ, HellaSwag, Natural Questions, PIQA, Social IQa, TriviaQA, Winogrande), while Gemma 3n E2B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Google
Gemma 3n E2B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

19.2B diff

Gemma 2 27B has 19.2B more parameters than Gemma 3n E2B, making it 240.0% larger.

Google
Gemma 2 27B
27.2Bparameters
Google
Gemma 3n E2B
8.0Bparameters
27.2B
Gemma 2 27B
8.0B
Gemma 3n E2B

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemma 3n E2B supports multimodal inputs, whereas Gemma 2 27B does not.

Gemma 3n E2B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 2 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 3n E2B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 2 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Gemma 3n E2B uses a proprietary license.

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

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Gemma 3n E2B

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27, while Gemma 3n E2B was released on 2025-06-26.

Gemma 3n E2B is 12 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

1.8 years ago

Gemma 3n E2B

Jun 26, 2025

9 months ago

12mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E2B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Gemma 2 27B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E2B's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Gemma 2 27B's cutoff date.

Gemma 2 27B

—

Gemma 3n E2B

Jun 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Google
Has open weights
Higher ARC-C score (71.4% vs 51.7%)
Higher ARC-E score (88.6% vs 75.8%)
Higher BoolQ score (84.8% vs 76.4%)
Higher HellaSwag score (86.4% vs 72.2%)
Higher Natural Questions score (34.5% vs 15.5%)
Higher PIQA score (83.2% vs 78.9%)
Higher Social IQa score (53.7% vs 48.8%)
Higher TriviaQA score (83.7% vs 60.8%)
Higher Winogrande score (83.7% vs 66.8%)
Google
Supports multimodal inputs

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemma 2 27B
Google
Gemma 3n E2B

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 27B vs Gemma 3n E2B

Gemma 2 27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 2 27B is made by Google and Gemma 3n E2B is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%. Gemma 3n E2B scores PIQA: 78.9%, BoolQ: 76.4%, ARC-E: 75.8%, HellaSwag: 72.2%, Winogrande: 66.8%.
Key differences include multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Gemma vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.