Model Comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (IFEval), while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is better at 6 benchmarks (AI2D, GPQA, MathVista-Mini, MMLU-Pro, MMMU (val), SimpleQA).
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking has 6.0B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 22.2% 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 Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Gemma 3 27B
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking 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 32B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is 6 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.
Mar 12, 2025
1.2 years ago
Sep 22, 2025
8 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.
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Gemma 3 27B
View detailsQwen3 VL 32B Thinking
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
| Feature |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking.