The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 2 27B vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -0.6.

Google · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -0.6, ranking #39 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemma 2 27B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  • overall performance matters — it scores 43.3 and ranks #39 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemma 2 27B
Google
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-0.6
#328
43.3
#39
Reasoning
-1.0
#324
44.7
#32
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
—
262,144

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Gemma 2 27B · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

Gemma 2 27B and Ling 3.0 Flash Findon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

96.8B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has 96.8B more parameters than Gemma 2 27B, making it 355.9% larger.

Google
Gemma 2 27B
27.2Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
27.2B
Gemma 2 27B
124.0B
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Ling 3.0 Flash Fin specifies input context (262,144 tokens). Only Ling 3.0 Flash Fin specifies output context (262,144 tokens).

Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 27 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

2.2 years ago

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

6 days ago

2.2yr 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→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemma 2 27B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 2 27B
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 27B vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, Gemma 2 27B or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -0.6. Gemma 2 27B is made by Google and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is made by InclusionAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemma 2 27B compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin scores SpreadSheetBench-v1: 86.5%, Finance Agent v1.1: 69.2%, Finance Agent v2: 59.8%, Tau3 Banking: 41.0%, APEX-Agents: 29.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 2 27B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Gemma 2 27B supports an unknown number of tokens and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemma 2 27B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-0.6 vs 43.3), licensing (Gemma vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 2 27B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Gemma 2 27B is developed by Google and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons