Model Comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
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.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
Cost data unavailable.
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct has 6.5B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 24.1% larger.
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).
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
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
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
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
Open weights
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.
Mar 12, 2025
1.1 years ago
1w newerFeb 28, 2025
1.1 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Gemma 3 27B
View details
Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct