Model Comparison

GLM-4.6 vs Gemma 3 27BWhich is better in 2026?

GLM-4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3 27B is 7.3x cheaper per token.

Verdict: GLM-4.6 vs Gemma 3 27B — which is better?

GLM-4.6 (by Zhipu AI) and Gemma 3 27B (by Google) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

GLM-4.6 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Gemma 3 27B is better at 0 benchmarks. GLM-4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

On price, Gemma 3 27B is roughly 7.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Choose GLM-4.6 if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2025

Choose Gemma 3 27B if…

  • cost matters — it's about 7.3x cheaper per token
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

GLM-4.6 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Gemma 3 27B is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sat Jun 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemma 3 27B costs less

For input processing, GLM-4.6 ($0.55/1M tokens) is 5.5x more expensive than Gemma 3 27B ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-4.6 ($2.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than Gemma 3 27B ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-4.6 is more expensive than Gemma 3 27B.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Jun 06 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Input tokens$0.55
Output tokens$2.00
Best providerFireworks
Google
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

330.0B diff

GLM-4.6 has 330.0B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 1222.2% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
357.0Bparameters
Google
Gemma 3 27B
27.0Bparameters
357.0B
GLM-4.6
27.0B
Gemma 3 27B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 131,072 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 131,072 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Google
Gemma 3 27B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Sat Jun 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both GLM-4.6 and Gemma 3 27B support multimodal inputs.

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

GLM-4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 3 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-4.6 is licensed under MIT, while Gemma 3 27B uses Gemma.

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

GLM-4.6

MIT

Open weights

Gemma 3 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-4.6 was released on 2025-09-30, while Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12.

GLM-4.6 is 7 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.

GLM-4.6

Sep 30, 2025

8 months ago

6mo newer
Gemma 3 27B

Mar 12, 2025

1.2 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

GLM-4.6 is available from Fireworks, DeepInfra. Gemma 3 27B is available from DeepInfra, Novita.

GLM-4.6

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.55/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.19/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M

Gemma 3 27B

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
novita logo
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

Zhipu AI
Higher GPQA score (81.0% vs 42.4%)
Google
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Google
Gemma 3 27B

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-4.6 vs Gemma 3 27B.

Which is better, GLM-4.6 or Gemma 3 27B?

GLM-4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-4.6 is made by Zhipu AI and Gemma 3 27B is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does GLM-4.6 compare to Gemma 3 27B in benchmarks?

GLM-4.6 scores AIME 2025: 93.9%, LiveCodeBench v6: 82.8%, GPQA: 81.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 68.0%, BrowseComp: 45.1%. Gemma 3 27B scores GSM8k: 95.9%, IFEval: 90.4%, MATH: 89.0%, HumanEval: 87.8%, BIG-Bench Hard: 87.6%.

Is GLM-4.6 cheaper than Gemma 3 27B?

Gemma 3 27B is 5.5x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-4.6 costs $0.55/M input and $2.00/M output via fireworks. Gemma 3 27B costs $0.10/M input and $0.20/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-4.6 and Gemma 3 27B?

GLM-4.6 supports 131K tokens and Gemma 3 27B supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GLM-4.6 and Gemma 3 27B?

Key differences include input pricing ($0.55 vs $0.10/M), licensing (MIT vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-4.6 and Gemma 3 27B?

GLM-4.6 is developed by Zhipu AI and Gemma 3 27B is developed by Google.

Related comparisons