Model comparison

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Gemma 2 27B

Gemini 3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.6 Flash Google

54.1

Rank #30 Confirmed

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.2

Rank #302 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.6 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 2 27B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 3.6 Flash leads 67.8 to 18.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 94.2% for Gemini 3.6 Flash and 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B.
  • Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $0.75 / $3.75 for Gemini 3.6 Flash.
  • Gemini 3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 8K.
  • Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemma 2 27B specifications
Gemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
ProviderGoogleGoogle
Noometry Index54.129.2
Released2026-07-212024-06-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M8K
Max output66K2K
Input $ / M tokens$0.75$0.65
Output $ / M tokens$3.75$0.65
Results tracked4634

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 49.6 (#45), Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
LMArena Coding14921211
DeepSWE46.7%—
FrontierCode34.4%—
LMArena WebDev1536—
SciCode52.7%—
WeirdML56.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—42.8%
LiveBench Coding—36%
BigCodeBench Complete—52.5%
ALE-Bench715.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 32.4 (#56), Gemma 2 27B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
APEX-Agents46.9%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 58.9 (#20), Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts14861199
DTBench95.5%48%
LMCA44.9%7.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index154.36122.06
ARC-AGI-260.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)89%—
ARC-AGI-191.2%—
CritPt10.6%—
Chess Puzzles43%—
LiveBench Reasoning—28.1%
Mystery Game Puzzles30%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—47.9%
LiveBench—38.2%

Math Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 57.0 (#33), Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.2%1.4%
LMArena Math15041212
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)58.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 422%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions70.8%—
ProofBench36%—
LiveBench Math—26.5%
MATH Level 5—27.9%

Knowledge Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 67.8 (#7), Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
GPQA Diamond94.1%36.5%
LMArena Expert14891172
SimpleQA Verified66.2%—
Confabulations—27.1%
MMLU—75.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 38.7 (#55), Gemma 2 27B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
LMArena Vision1297—
Blueprint-Bench 231.2%—
Furniture Assembly23.3%—
LMArena Document1456—

Multilingual Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 56.8 (#17), Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
LMArena Non-English14701217
LMArena Chinese15301221
LMArena French15011246
LMArena German14781209
LMArena Japanese14771175
LMArena Korean14351174
LMArena Russian14901234
LMArena Spanish14771228

Instruction Following Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 77.2 (#27), Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
LMArena Instruction Following14671206
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.1%

Long Context Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 45.1 (#47), Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
LMArena Longer Query14751231

Writing & Preference Gemini 3.6 Flash leads

Gemini 3.6 Flash: 68.3 (#26), Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 3.6 FlashGemma 2 27B
LMArena Text14781231
LMArena Creative Writing14641241
LMArena Multi-Turn14811224
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1604—
LiveBench Language—32.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.6 Flash better than Gemma 2 27B?

Gemini 3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.6 Flash 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; Gemini 3.6 Flash lists at $0.75 and $3.75.

Is Gemini 3.6 Flash or Gemma 2 27B better for coding?

Gemini 3.6 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.6 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.6 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemma 2 27B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.6 Flash has 46 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2 27B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper