Model comparison
Gemma 2 27B vs Kimi K2.7 Code
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.7 Code's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Kimi K2.7 Code in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.7 Code leads 52.6 to 10.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.4% for Gemma 2 27B and 95.6% for Kimi K2.7 Code.
- Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.7 Code.
- Kimi K2.7 Code accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 8K.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | |
| Noometry Index | 29.2 | 43.0 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2026-06-12 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 8K | 262K |
| Max output | 2K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $0.95 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $4 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), Kimi K2.7 Code: 42.4 (#92)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | — | 30.5% |
| FrontierCode | — | 30.1% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1473 |
| SciCode | — | 47.5% |
| WeirdML | — | 54.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 886.23 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: —, Kimi K2.7 Code: 23.9 (#115)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 37.6% |
| GBAEval | — | 0.9% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,083 |
Reasoning Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), Kimi K2.7 Code: 38.2 (#56)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.06 | 150.01 |
| SimpleBench | — | 57.9% |
| CritPt | — | 10% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1199 | — |
| DTBench | 48% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LMCA | 7.1% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 48.8% |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |
Math Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), Kimi K2.7 Code: 52.6 (#39)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | 95.6% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 54% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 12.2% |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1212 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), Kimi K2.7 Code: 53.6 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | 87.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 36.5% |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | — |
| MMLU | 75.7% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), Kimi K2.7 Code: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | — |
| LMArena French | 1246 | — |
| LMArena German | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), Kimi K2.7 Code: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), Kimi K2.7 Code: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), Kimi K2.7 Code: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 27B better than Kimi K2.7 Code?
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 2 27B costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.7 Code's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Kimi K2.7 Code?
Gemma 2 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.7 Code lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is Gemma 2 27B or Kimi K2.7 Code better for coding?
Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K2.7 Code does, with 262K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Kimi K2.7 Code share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.7 Code has 19.