The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 2 27B vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct are closely matched at -0.6 and -5.9 on the LLM Stats Score.

Google · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at -0.6 and -5.9.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Gemma 2 27B

  • you are already invested in the Google ecosystem

Choose Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 5 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2024

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemma 2 27B
Google
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-0.6
#318
-5.9
#349
Reasoning
-1.0
#314
-6.6
#341
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 5
3 of 5
Input price
— / M
$0.01 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.02 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Gemma 2 27B
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Math
-0.3#289
-3.3#304
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Gemma 2 27B · 15 for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

5 shared

Gemma 2 27B outperforms in 2 benchmarks (HellaSwag, MMLU), while Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is better at 3 benchmarks (ARC-C, GSM8k, MATH).

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

24.0B diff

Gemma 2 27B has 24.0B more parameters than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct, making it 747.4% larger.

Google
Gemma 2 27B
27.2Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
3.2Bparameters
27.2B
Gemma 2 27B
3.2B
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 2 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Llama 3.2 3B Instruct uses Llama 3.2 Community License.

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

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Llama 3.2 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27, while Llama 3.2 3B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is 3 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

2.2 years ago

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

2.0 years ago

3mo 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 Llama 3.2 3B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 2 27B
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 27B vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 2 27B or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at -0.6 and -5.9. Gemma 2 27B is made by Google and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is made by Meta. 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 Llama 3.2 3B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct scores NIH/Multi-needle: 84.7%, ARC-C: 78.6%, GSM8k: 77.7%, IFEval: 77.4%, HellaSwag: 69.8%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Gemma 2 27B supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct supports 128K 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 Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-0.6 vs -5.9), licensing (Gemma vs Llama 3.2 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Gemma 2 27B is developed by Google and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons