Model Comparison

GLM-5 vs Gemma 3 27BWhich is better in 2026?

Comparing GLM-5 and Gemma 3 27B across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: GLM-5 vs Gemma 3 27B — which is better?

GLM-5 (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.

On price, Gemma 3 27B is roughly 12.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GLM-5 also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose GLM-5 if…

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026

Choose Gemma 3 27B if…

  • cost matters — it's about 12.4x cheaper per token
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

GLM-5 and Gemma 3 27B don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemma 3 27B costs less

For input processing, GLM-5 ($1.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than Gemma 3 27B ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5 ($3.20/1M tokens) is 16.0x more expensive than Gemma 3 27B ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5 is more expensive than Gemma 3 27B.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input tokens$1.00
Output tokens$3.20
Best providerFriendliAI
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

717.0B diff

GLM-5 has 717.0B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 2655.6% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
744.0Bparameters
Google
Gemma 3 27B
27.0Bparameters
744.0B
GLM-5
27.0B
Gemma 3 27B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GLM-5 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Gemma 3 27B's 131,072 tokens. Gemma 3 27B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while GLM-5 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Google
Gemma 3 27B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Sun Jun 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemma 3 27B supports multimodal inputs, whereas GLM-5 does not.

Gemma 3 27B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GLM-5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 3 27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5 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-5

MIT

Open weights

Gemma 3 27B

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5 was released on 2026-02-11, while Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12.

GLM-5 is 11 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.

GLM-5

Feb 11, 2026

3 months ago

11mo 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-5 is available from FriendliAI, ZAI. Gemma 3 27B is available from DeepInfra, Novita.

GLM-5

friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M

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
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Google
Supports multimodal inputs
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Google
Gemma 3 27B

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5 vs Gemma 3 27B.

Which is better, GLM-5 or Gemma 3 27B?

GLM-5 (Zhipu AI) and Gemma 3 27B (Google) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does GLM-5 compare to Gemma 3 27B in benchmarks?

GLM-5 scores t2-bench: 89.7%, SWE-Bench Verified: 77.8%, BrowseComp: 75.9%, MCP Atlas: 67.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 56.2%. Gemma 3 27B scores GSM8k: 95.9%, IFEval: 90.4%, MATH: 89.0%, HumanEval: 87.8%, BIG-Bench Hard: 87.6%.

Is GLM-5 cheaper than Gemma 3 27B?

Gemma 3 27B is 10.0x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5 costs $1.00/M input and $3.20/M output via friendli. Gemma 3 27B costs $0.10/M input and $0.20/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5 and Gemma 3 27B?

GLM-5 supports 200K 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-5 and Gemma 3 27B?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 131K), input pricing ($1.00 vs $0.10/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5 and Gemma 3 27B?

GLM-5 is developed by Zhipu AI and Gemma 3 27B is developed by Google.

Related comparisons