Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs GLM-4.5V
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 9.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 2 categories and GLM-4.5V in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.5V leads 38.9 to 22.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 40.4% for Gemma 3 27B and 59.8% for GLM-4.5V.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $1.80 for GLM-4.5V.
- Gemma 3 27B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 64K.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 39.2 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2025-08-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 64K |
| Max output | 8K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $1.80 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), GLM-4.5V: 38.9 (#152)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1347 |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| SciCode | 21.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), GLM-4.5V: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), GLM-4.5V: 26.5 (#118)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | 59.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1335 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LMCA | 12.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), GLM-4.5V: 34.7 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1353 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), GLM-4.5V: 36.8 (#155)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1303 | 1353 |
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), GLM-4.5V: 33.6 (#86)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1165 | 1154 |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), GLM-4.5V: 44.9 (#172)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1304 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1347 | 1338 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1299 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1348 | 1335 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | — |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |
Instruction Following Gemma 3 27B leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), GLM-4.5V: 69.4 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1311 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#166)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1305 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), GLM-4.5V: 52.7 (#162)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1333 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1295 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1344 | 1333 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than GLM-4.5V?
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 9.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or GLM-4.5V?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5V lists at $0.60 and $1.80.
Is Gemma 3 27B or GLM-4.5V better for coding?
GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 22.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemma 3 27B does, with 131K tokens against 64K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and GLM-4.5V share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5V has 15.