Model Comparison

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Gemma 3 27B

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3 27B is 10.8x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B outperforms in 4 benchmarks (GPQA, IFEval, MMLU-Pro, WMT24++), while Gemma 3 27B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Apr 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemma 3 27B costs less

For input processing, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($0.60/1M tokens) is 6.0x more expensive than Gemma 3 27B ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($3.60/1M tokens) is 18.0x more expensive than Gemma 3 27B ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is more expensive than Gemma 3 27B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers

Mon Apr 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Input tokens$0.60

Output tokens$3.60

Best providerNovita

Gemma 3 27B

Input tokens$0.10

Output tokens$0.20

Best providerDeepinfra

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

370.0B diff

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B has 370.0B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 1370.4% larger.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

397.0Bparameters

Gemma 3 27B

27.0Bparameters

397.0B

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

27.0B

Gemma 3 27B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Gemma 3 27B's 131,072 tokens. Gemma 3 27B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Input262,144 tokens

Output64,000 tokens

Gemma 3 27B

Input131,072 tokens

Output131,072 tokens

Mon Apr 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Qwen3.5-397B-A17B and Gemma 3 27B support multimodal inputs.

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

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Gemma 3 27B

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Gemma 3 27B uses Gemma.

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

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Gemma 3 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B was released on 2026-02-16, while Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 11 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Feb 16, 2026

2 months ago

11mo newer

Gemma 3 27B

Mar 12, 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.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is available from Novita. Gemma 3 27B is available from DeepInfra, Novita.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Novita

Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.60/1M

Gemma 3 27B

Deepinfra

Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M

Novita

Input Price:Input: $0.11/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M

* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Larger context window (262,144 tokens)

Higher GPQA score (88.4% vs 42.4%)

Higher IFEval score (92.6% vs 90.4%)

Higher MMLU-Pro score (87.8% vs 67.5%)

Higher WMT24++ score (78.9% vs 53.4%)

Gemma 3 27B

View details

Google

Less expensive input tokens

Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Qwen3.5-397B-A17B	Gemma 3 27B

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Gemma 3 27B

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Gemma 3 27B is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B scores MMLU-Redux: 94.9%, HMMT 2025: 94.8%, C-Eval: 93.0%, HMMT25: 92.7%, IFEval: 92.6%. Gemma 3 27B scores GSM8k: 95.9%, IFEval: 90.4%, MATH: 89.0%, HumanEval: 87.8%, BIG-Bench Hard: 87.6%.

Gemma 3 27B is 6.0x cheaper for input tokens. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B costs $0.60/M input and $3.60/M output via novita. Gemma 3 27B costs $0.10/M input and $0.20/M output via deepinfra.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B supports 262K tokens and Gemma 3 27B supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

Key differences include context window (262K vs 131K), input pricing ($0.60 vs $0.10/M), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Gemma 3 27B is developed by Google.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Gemma 3 27B

Performance Benchmarks

Arena Performance

Pricing Analysis

Model Size

Context Window

Input Capabilities

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Gemma 3 27B

License

Release Timeline

Knowledge Cutoff

Provider Availability

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Gemma 3 27B

Outputs Comparison

Key Takeaways

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Gemma 3 27B

Detailed Comparison

FAQ

Which is better, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B or Gemma 3 27B?

How does Qwen3.5-397B-A17B compare to Gemma 3 27B in benchmarks?

Is Qwen3.5-397B-A17B cheaper than Gemma 3 27B?

What are the context window sizes for Qwen3.5-397B-A17B and Gemma 3 27B?

What are the main differences between Qwen3.5-397B-A17B and Gemma 3 27B?

Who makes Qwen3.5-397B-A17B and Gemma 3 27B?