The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 2 27B vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct leads the LLM Stats Score 13.8 to -0.7.

Google · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct leads the overall LLM Stats Score 13.8 to -0.7, ranking #242 overall.

In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Llama 3.3 70B 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 3.3 70B Instruct

  • overall performance matters — it scores 13.8 and ranks #242 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 3 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Dec 2024

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemma 2 27B
Google
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-0.7
#330
13.8
#242
Reasoning
-1.1
#326
11.7
#251
Coding
-7.9
#263
9.3
#173
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 3
3 of 3
Input price
— / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.20 / M
Context window
—
131,072

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Gemma 2 27B
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Math
-0.7#297
17.5#194
Legal
1.9#173
14.0#114
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Gemma 2 27B · 9 for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

3 shared

Gemma 2 27B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is better at 3 benchmarks (HumanEval, MATH, MMLU).

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sat Sep 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

42.8B diff

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct has 42.8B more parameters than Gemma 2 27B, making it 157.4% larger.

Google
Gemma 2 27B
27.2Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
70.0Bparameters
27.2B
Gemma 2 27B
70.0B
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct specifies input context (131,072 tokens). Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Sat Sep 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 2 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Llama 3.3 70B Instruct uses Llama 3.3 Community License Agreement.

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

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Llama 3.3 Community License Agreement

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27, while Llama 3.3 70B Instruct was released on 2024-12-06.

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is 5 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

2.2 years ago

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Dec 6, 2024

1.8 years ago

5mo 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 3.3 70B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 2 27B
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 27B vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 2 27B or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct leads the LLM Stats Score 13.8 to -0.7. Gemma 2 27B is made by Google and Llama 3.3 70B 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 3.3 70B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%. Llama 3.3 70B Instruct scores IFEval: 92.1%, MGSM: 91.1%, HumanEval: 88.4%, MBPP EvalPlus: 87.6%, MMLU: 86.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Gemma 2 27B supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 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 Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-0.7 vs 13.8), licensing (Gemma vs Llama 3.3 Community License Agreement). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 2 27B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Gemma 2 27B is developed by Google and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons