Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs Llama 13b

Gemma 2 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.2 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.2

Rank #302 Confirmed

Llama 13b Meta

23.9

Rank #344 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 13b in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemma 2 27B leads 44.4 to 13.9.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27B and Llama 13b specifications
Gemma 2 27BLlama 13b
ProviderGoogleMeta
Noometry Index29.223.9
Released2024-06-242023-02-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K—
Max output2K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.65—
Output $ / M tokens$0.65—
Results tracked3421

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

Category by category

Coding Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), Llama 13b: 20.9 (#332)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
LMArena Coding1211683
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—

Reasoning Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), Llama 13b: 13.4 (#327)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
LMArena Hard Prompts1199728
Epoch Capabilities Index122.06100.09
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
BIG-Bench Hard—37.9%
HellaSwag—79.2%
LAMBADA—75.2%
LiveBench38.2%—
PIQA—80.1%
WinoGrande—73%

Math Llama 13b leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), Llama 13b: 24.4 (#259)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
LMArena Math1212838
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—
GSM8K—20.6%

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), Llama 13b: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
MMLU75.7%47.7%
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
Confabulations27.1%—
LMArena Expert1172—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—52.7%
BoolQ—78.7%
OpenBookQA—56.4%
TriviaQA—77.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, Llama 13b: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
ScienceQA—43.3%

Multilingual Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), Llama 13b: 16.8 (#292)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
LMArena Non-English1217819
LMArena Chinese1221—
LMArena French1246—
LMArena German1209—
LMArena Japanese1175—
LMArena Korean1174—
LMArena Russian1234—
LMArena Spanish1228—

Instruction Following Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), Llama 13b: 36.9 (#300)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
LMArena Instruction Following1206781
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), Llama 13b: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
LMArena Longer Query1231—

Writing & Preference Gemma 2 27B leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), Llama 13b: 13.9 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BLlama 13b
LMArena Text1231834
LMArena Creative Writing1241794
LMArena Multi-Turn1224753
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than Llama 13b?

Gemma 2 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.2 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 27B or Llama 13b better for coding?

Gemma 2 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.5 versus 20.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Llama 13b share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Llama 13b has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper