The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct are closely matched at 8.6 and 10.4 on the LLM Stats Score.

Google · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 8.6 and 10.4.

In the 8 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct wins 7; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemma 3 27B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Mar 2025

Choose Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 7 of 8 exact shared results

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
8.6
#260
10.4
#247
8.9
#252
9.0
#250
5.4
#183
12.5
#130
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 8
7 of 8
Input price
$0.10 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.20 / M
— / M
Context window
131,072

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Gemma 3 27B
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
17.8#178
11.8#225
-2.5#183
7.3#134
-0.1#144
10.0#110
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

27 reported for Gemma 3 27B · 28 for Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

8 shared

Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MATH), while Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct is better at 7 benchmarks (DocVQA, GPQA, HumanEval, InfoVQA, MathVista-Mini, MBPP, MMLU-Pro).

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Aug 30 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

6.5B diff

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct has 6.5B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 24.1% larger.

Google
Gemma 3 27B
27.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
33.5Bparameters
27.0B
Gemma 3 27B
33.5B
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

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
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sun Aug 30 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct support multimodal inputs.

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

Gemma 3 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

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

Gemma 3 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12, while Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct was released on 2025-02-28.

Gemma 3 27B is 0 month newer than Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct.

Gemma 3 27B

Mar 12, 2025

1.5 years ago

1w newer
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Feb 28, 2025

1.5 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

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 3 27B
✓ Preferred
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 3 27B or Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 8.6 and 10.4. Gemma 3 27B is made by Google and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct 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 3 27B compare to Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 3 27B scores GSM8k: 95.9%, IFEval: 90.4%, MATH: 89.0%, HumanEval: 87.8%, BIG-Bench Hard: 87.6%. Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct scores DocVQA: 94.8%, Android Control Low_EM: 93.3%, HumanEval: 91.5%, ScreenSpot: 88.5%, MBPP: 84.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B supports 131K tokens and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct 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 Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (8.6 vs 10.4), licensing (Gemma vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 3 27B and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Gemma 3 27B is developed by Google and Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.