The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 2 27B vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Gemma 2 27B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct are closely matched at -0.7 and -3.8 on the LLM Stats Score.

Google · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemma 2 27B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at -0.7 and -3.8.

In the 11 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Phi-3.5-mini-instruct wins 6; 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 Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 11 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2024

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemma 2 27B
Google
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-0.7
#336
-3.8
#352
Reasoning
-1.1
#332
-4.7
#348
Coding
-7.9
#269
-6.8
#267
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
5 of 11
6 of 11
Input price
— / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.10 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Gemma 2 27B
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Math
-0.7#298
-1.5#305
Legal
1.9#174
0.6#183
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Gemma 2 27B · 31 for Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

11 shared

Gemma 2 27B outperforms in 5 benchmarks (BoolQ, HellaSwag, MMLU, PIQA, Winogrande), while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is better at 6 benchmarks (ARC-C, GSM8k, HumanEval, MATH, MBPP, Social IQa).

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Sat Sep 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

23.4B diff

Gemma 2 27B has 23.4B more parameters than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct, making it 615.8% larger.

Google
Gemma 2 27B
27.2Bparameters
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
3.8Bparameters
27.2B
Gemma 2 27B
3.8B
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Phi-3.5-mini-instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Phi-3.5-mini-instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Google
Gemma 2 27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Sat Sep 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 2 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct uses MIT.

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

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is 2 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

2.2 years ago

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

2.1 years ago

1mo 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 Phi-3.5-mini-instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 2 27B
✓ Preferred
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 27B vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 2 27B or Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Gemma 2 27B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at -0.7 and -3.8. Gemma 2 27B is made by Google and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is made by Microsoft. 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 Phi-3.5-mini-instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%. Phi-3.5-mini-instruct scores GSM8k: 86.2%, ARC-C: 84.6%, RULER: 84.1%, PIQA: 81.0%, OpenBookQA: 79.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 2 27B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Gemma 2 27B supports an unknown number of tokens and Phi-3.5-mini-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 Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-0.7 vs -3.8), licensing (Gemma vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 2 27B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Gemma 2 27B is developed by Google and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons