Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct leads the LLM Stats Score 24.7 to 8.3. Gemma 3 27B is 3.7x cheaper per token.
Google · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct leads the overall LLM Stats Score 24.7 to 8.3, ranking #161 overall.
In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Gemma 3 27B is roughly 3.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct also accepts a larger context window (262,144 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Gemma 3 27B
- cost matters — it's about 3.7x cheaper per token
Choose Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
- overall performance matters — it scores 24.7 and ranks #161 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 5 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2025
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
27 reported for Gemma 3 27B · 50 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (IFEval), while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is better at 4 benchmarks (AI2D, MathVista-Mini, MMLU-Pro, SimpleQA).
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.08/1M tokens) is 2.5x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($0.20/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.16/1M tokens) is 5.5x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($0.88/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is more expensive than Gemma 3 27B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct has 209.0B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 774.1% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Gemma 3 27B's 131,072 tokens. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Gemma 3 27B is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Gemma 3 27B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Gemma 3 27B
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B 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 Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct was released on 2025-09-22.
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is 6 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.
Mar 12, 2025
1.5 years ago
Sep 22, 2025
11 months ago
6mo 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. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Novita.
Gemma 3 27B
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Gemma 3 27B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.