Model comparison
Command R+ vs Gemma 3 27B
Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 44× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command R+'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
GoogleSummary
- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 4 categories and Gemma 3 27B in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Command R+ leads 36.4 to 25.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Math: 21.3% for Command R+ and 55.4% for Gemma 3 27B.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
- Gemma 3 27B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2025-03-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 4K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.08 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.16 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 43 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Command R+ leads
Command R+: 29.1 (#309), Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | 39.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 1322 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 4.9% |
| SciCode | — | 21.2% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command R+: —, Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 29.5% |
Reasoning Gemma 3 27B leads
Command R+: 9.2 (#344), Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | 43.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 1340 |
| DTBench | 54.9% | 52.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | 51.5% |
| LMCA | 5% | 12.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.34 | 130.04 |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | 50% |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 40.4% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
Math Command R+ leads
Command R+: 28.9 (#242), Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | 55.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1312 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 22.5% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 74% |
Knowledge Command R+ leads
Command R+: 36.4 (#169), Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 1304 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 47.7% |
| Confabulations | — | 40.3% |
| MMLU | 69.4% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command R+: —, Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
| GeoBench | — | 52% |
Multilingual Gemma 3 27B leads
Command R+: 38.6 (#227), Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1334 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1346 |
| LMArena French | 1209 | 1368 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 1362 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | 1308 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 1349 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | 1349 |
Instruction Following Gemma 3 27B leads
Command R+: 60.0 (#254), Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | 74.9% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 1321 |
Long Context Command R+ leads
Command R+: 37.3 (#219), Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1230 | 1333 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 33.3% |
Writing & Preference Gemma 3 27B leads
Command R+: 43.5 (#228), Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Gemma 3 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1358 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1346 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 1345 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | 34.6% |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 79.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1266 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R+ better than Gemma 3 27B?
Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 44× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command R+'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Gemma 3 27B?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.
Is Command R+ or Gemma 3 27B better for coding?
Command R+ scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.1 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemma 3 27B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Gemma 3 27B share?
28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3 27B has 43.