Model Comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs MiMo-V2.5-ProWhich is better in 2026?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Gemma 3 27B is 4.3x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Gemma 3 27B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro — which is better?
Gemma 3 27B (by Google) and MiMo-V2.5-Pro (by Xiaomi) 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 (MATH), while MiMo-V2.5-Pro is better at 3 benchmarks (GPQA, GSM8k, MMLU-Pro). MiMo-V2.5-Pro shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
On price, Gemma 3 27B is roughly 4.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Gemma 3 27B if…
- cost matters — it's about 4.3x cheaper per token
Choose MiMo-V2.5-Pro if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 3 of 4 shared benchmarks
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2026
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MATH), while MiMo-V2.5-Pro is better at 3 benchmarks (GPQA, GSM8k, MMLU-Pro).
MiMo-V2.5-Pro shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.10/1M tokens) is 4.3x cheaper than MiMo-V2.5-Pro ($0.43/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.20/1M tokens) is 4.3x cheaper than MiMo-V2.5-Pro ($0.87/1M tokens).
In conclusion, MiMo-V2.5-Pro is more expensive than Gemma 3 27B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 996.2B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 3689.8% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Gemma 3 27B's 131,072 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 131,072 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Gemma 3 27B supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2.5-Pro does not.
Gemma 3 27B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Gemma 3 27B
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while MiMo-V2.5-Pro uses MIT.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Gemma
Open weights
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12, while MiMo-V2.5-Pro was released on 2026-04-27.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is 14 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.
Mar 12, 2025
1.4 years ago
Apr 27, 2026
3 months ago
1.1yr 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. MiMo-V2.5-Pro is available from Xiaomi, DeepInfra, Novita.
Gemma 3 27B
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Gemma 3 27B
View detailsDetailed Comparison
Interactive Arena
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Gemma 3 27B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro.