Gemma 3 27B vs Inkling 2 Small
Inkling 2 Small leads the LLM Stats Score 47.2 to 7.7. Gemma 3 27B is 4.7x cheaper per token.
Google · Thinking Machines Lab · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Inkling 2 Small leads the overall LLM Stats Score 47.2 to 7.7, ranking #39 overall.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Inkling 2 Small wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Gemma 3 27B is roughly 4.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Inkling 2 Small also accepts a larger context window (256,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Gemma 3 27B
- cost matters — it's about 4.7x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Choose Inkling 2 Small
- overall performance matters — it scores 47.2 and ranks #39 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 256,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
27 reported for Gemma 3 27B · 11 for Inkling 2 Small
Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Inkling 2 Small is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).
Inkling 2 Small significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.08/1M tokens) is 3.8x cheaper than Inkling 2 Small ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.16/1M tokens) is 6.3x cheaper than Inkling 2 Small ($1.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Inkling 2 Small is more expensive than Gemma 3 27B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Inkling 2 Small has 567.0B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 2100.0% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Inkling 2 Small accepts 256,000 input tokens compared to Gemma 3 27B's 131,072 tokens. Only Gemma 3 27B specifies output context (131,072 tokens).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Gemma 3 27B and Inkling 2 Small support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Gemma 3 27B
Inkling 2 Small
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Inkling 2 Small uses a proprietary license.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Gemma
Open weights
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12, while Inkling 2 Small was released on 2026-11-05.
Inkling 2 Small is 20 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.
Mar 12, 2025
1.7 years ago
Nov 5, 2026
3 days ago
1.7yr newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Gemma 3 27B is available from DeepInfra, Novita. Inkling 2 Small is available from Thinking Machines Lab.
Gemma 3 27B
Inkling 2 Small
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Gemma 3 27B and Inkling 2 Small side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Inkling 2 Small.