Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 1 category and Grok 4.3 in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.3 leads 52.5 to 25.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B and 93.3% for Grok 4.3.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.3.
- Grok 4.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 43.8 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2026-04-17 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 1M |
| Max output | 8K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 21.2% | 47.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1415 |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1357 |
| WeirdML | — | 49.9% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 944.17 |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 8% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1165 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 35.26 |
Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 25% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1396 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 90.7% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 38.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 149.16 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 55.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.3 |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 42.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 14.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 11% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 88.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | 1385 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 33.2% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Too close to call
Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1229 |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
Multilingual Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | 1422 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1412 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | 1395 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1379 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1356 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1399 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | 1398 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1366 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1393 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1380 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | 1406 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1075 |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Grok 4.3?
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.3?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Grok 4.3 lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.3 better for coding?
Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.3 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Grok 4.3 share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.3 has 40.