Model Comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs Kimi-k1.5Which is better in 2026?

Gemma 3 27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Verdict: Gemma 3 27B vs Kimi-k1.5 — which is better?

Gemma 3 27B (by Google) and Kimi-k1.5 (by Moonshot AI) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (IFEval), while Kimi-k1.5 is better at 0 benchmarks. Gemma 3 27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Choose Gemma 3 27B if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Mar 2025
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Kimi-k1.5 if…

  • you are already invested in the Moonshot AI ecosystem
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (IFEval), while Kimi-k1.5 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Jun 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Gemma 3 27B specifies input context (131,072 tokens). Only Gemma 3 27B specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Google
Gemma 3 27B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Moonshot AI
Kimi-k1.5
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Jun 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Gemma 3 27B and Kimi-k1.5 support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Gemma 3 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Kimi-k1.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Kimi-k1.5 uses a proprietary license.

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

Gemma 3 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Kimi-k1.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12, while Kimi-k1.5 was released on 2025-01-20.

Gemma 3 27B is 2 months newer than Kimi-k1.5.

Gemma 3 27B

Mar 12, 2025

1.2 years ago

1mo newer
Kimi-k1.5

Jan 20, 2025

1.4 years ago

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→

Key Takeaways

Google
Larger context window (131,072 tokens)
Has open weights
Higher IFEval score (90.4% vs 87.2%)
Moonshot AI

No standout differentiators in the data we have for this pair.

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemma 3 27B
Moonshot AI
Kimi-k1.5

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Kimi-k1.5.

Which is better, Gemma 3 27B or Kimi-k1.5?

Gemma 3 27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3 27B is made by Google and Kimi-k1.5 is made by Moonshot AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Gemma 3 27B compare to Kimi-k1.5 in benchmarks?

Gemma 3 27B scores GSM8k: 95.9%, IFEval: 90.4%, MATH: 89.0%, HumanEval: 87.8%, BIG-Bench Hard: 87.6%. Kimi-k1.5 scores MATH-500: 96.2%, CLUEWSC: 91.4%, C-Eval: 88.3%, MMLU: 87.4%, IFEval: 87.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 3 27B and Kimi-k1.5?

Gemma 3 27B supports 131K tokens and Kimi-k1.5 supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemma 3 27B and Kimi-k1.5?

Key differences include licensing (Gemma vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 3 27B and Kimi-k1.5?

Gemma 3 27B is developed by Google and Kimi-k1.5 is developed by Moonshot AI.

Related comparisons