The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B

Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-0.8B are closely matched at -0.6 and -5.9 on the LLM Stats Score.

Google · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-0.8B are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at -0.6 and -5.9.

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 Qwen3.5-0.8B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Mar 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
-0.6
#319
-5.9
#349
-1.0
#315
-3.2
#324
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Gemma 2 27B
Qwen3.5-0.8B
-0.3#289
-6.4#314
2.5#164
-4.9#190
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Gemma 2 27B · 20 for Qwen3.5-0.8B

No common benchmarks found

Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-0.8Bdon'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

26.4B diff

Gemma 2 27B has 26.4B more parameters than Qwen3.5-0.8B, making it 3300.0% larger.

Google
Gemma 2 27B
27.2Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-0.8B
800,000,000parameters
27.2B
Gemma 2 27B
0.8B
Qwen3.5-0.8B

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.5-0.8B supports multimodal inputs, whereas Gemma 2 27B does not.

Qwen3.5-0.8B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 2 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 2 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Qwen3.5-0.8B uses Apache 2.0.

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

Gemma 2 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 2 27B was released on 2024-06-27, while Qwen3.5-0.8B was released on 2026-03-02.

Qwen3.5-0.8B is 20 months newer than Gemma 2 27B.

Gemma 2 27B

Jun 27, 2024

2.2 years ago

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Mar 2, 2026

6 months ago

1.7yr 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 Qwen3.5-0.8B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 2 27B
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.5-0.8B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B.

Which is better, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-0.8B are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at -0.6 and -5.9. Gemma 2 27B is made by Google and Qwen3.5-0.8B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. 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 Qwen3.5-0.8B in benchmarks?

Gemma 2 27B scores ARC-E: 88.6%, HellaSwag: 86.4%, BoolQ: 84.8%, TriviaQA: 83.7%, Winogrande: 83.7%. Qwen3.5-0.8B scores MMLU-Redux: 59.5%, Global PIQA: 59.4%, C-Eval: 50.5%, MMMLU: 44.3%, IFEval: 44.0%.

What are the main differences between Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-0.6 vs -5.9), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Gemma vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Gemma 2 27B is developed by Google and Qwen3.5-0.8B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.