Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale vs Gemma 2 27B

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale DeepSeek

39.7

Rank #162 Reported

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads 32.9 to 15.3.
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $0.58 / $1.68 for DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and Gemma 2 27B specifications
DeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
ProviderDeepSeekGoogle
Noometry Index39.729.4
Released2025-12-012024-06-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K8K
Max output128K2K
Input $ / M tokens$0.58$0.65
Output $ / M tokens$1.68$0.65
Results tracked334

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 40.4 (#140), Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
WeirdML46.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—42.8%
LiveBench Coding—36%
LMArena Coding—1211
BigCodeBench Complete—52.5%

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 32.9 (#73), Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
SimpleBench52.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning—28.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1198
DTBench—48%
LiveBench Data Analysis—47.9%
LMCA—7.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—122.08
LiveBench—38.2%

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—1.4%
LiveBench Math—26.5%
LMArena Math—1212
MATH Level 5—27.9%

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
GPQA Diamond—36.5%
Confabulations—27.1%
LMArena Expert—1172
MMLU—75.7%

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
LMArena Non-English—1217
LMArena Chinese—1221
LMArena French—1247
LMArena German—1209
LMArena Japanese—1175
LMArena Korean—1174
LMArena Russian—1234
LMArena Spanish—1228

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.1%
LMArena Instruction Following—1206

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
LMArena Longer Query—1231

Writing & Preference DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 46.0 (#222), Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-SpecialeGemma 2 27B
LMArena Text—1231
LMArena Creative Writing—1241
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1276—
LMArena Multi-Turn—1224
LiveBench Language—32.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale better than Gemma 2 27B?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or Gemma 2 27B?

Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale lists at $0.58 and $1.68.

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale does, with 128K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and Gemma 2 27B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has 3 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper