Model Comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 3.2 11B InstructWhich is better in 2026?
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct has a slight edge in benchmark performance. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is 2.5x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct — which is better?
Gemma 3 27B (by Google) and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct (by Meta) 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 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MATH), while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is better at 3 benchmarks (AI2D, ChartQA, DocVQA). Llama 3.2 11B Instruct has a slight edge in benchmark performance.
On price, Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is roughly 2.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Gemma 3 27B also accepts a larger context window (131,072 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Gemma 3 27B if…
- you process long inputs — it offers a 131,072 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Mar 2025
Choose Llama 3.2 11B Instruct if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 3 of 5 shared benchmarks
- cost matters — it's about 2.5x cheaper per token
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MATH), while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is better at 3 benchmarks (AI2D, ChartQA, DocVQA).
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct has a slight edge in benchmark performance.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.10/1M tokens) is 2.0x more expensive than Llama 3.2 11B Instruct ($0.05/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.20/1M tokens) is 4.0x more expensive than Llama 3.2 11B Instruct ($0.05/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Gemma 3 27B is more expensive than Llama 3.2 11B Instruct.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Gemma 3 27B has 16.4B more parameters than Llama 3.2 11B Instruct, making it 154.7% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Gemma 3 27B accepts 131,072 input tokens compared to Llama 3.2 11B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Gemma 3 27B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is limited to 128,000 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Both Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Gemma 3 27B
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct uses Llama 3.2 Community License.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Gemma
Open weights
Llama 3.2 Community License
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12, while Llama 3.2 11B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.
Gemma 3 27B is 6 months newer than Llama 3.2 11B Instruct.
Mar 12, 2025
1.3 years ago
5mo newerSep 25, 2024
1.8 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2023-12-31, while Gemma 3 27B's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Llama 3.2 11B Instruct's training data extends to 2023-12-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Gemma 3 27B's cutoff date.
—
Dec 2023
Provider Availability
Gemma 3 27B is available from DeepInfra, Novita. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Sambanova, Bedrock, Groq, Together, Fireworks.
Gemma 3 27B
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Gemma 3 27B
View detailsDetailed Comparison
Interactive Arena
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Gemma 3 27B and Llama 3.2 11B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 3.2 11B Instruct.