Model comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Grok 4.5
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.5 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.0 to 16.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 22.5% for Gemma 3 27B and 97.8% for Grok 4.5.
- Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
- Grok 4.5 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 55.0 |
| Released | 2025-03-11 | 2026-07-08 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 500K |
| Max output | 8K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.16 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 22.1 (#329), Grok 4.5: 51.7 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 21.2% | 54.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1473 |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.8% |
| FrontierCode | — | 42.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1552 |
| WeirdML | — | 46.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,309 |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 24.9 (#105), Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#15)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.2% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 47.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 23.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 65.4% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1213 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,887 |
Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 16.3 (#297), Grok 4.5: 56.0 (#23)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | 83.5% |
| CritPt | 0% | 15.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 36% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1462 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 96.5% |
| LMCA | 12.3% | 45.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | 154.02 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 52.6% |
| SimpleBench | — | 70% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 74.4% |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |
Math Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 24.4 (#261), Grok 4.5: 60.7 (#29)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | 97.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | 1457 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 24.4% |
| ProofBench | — | 31% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 25.4 (#256), Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#21)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | 93.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1303 | 1466 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 48.3% |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 32.0 (#94), Grok 4.5: 37.8 (#63)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1165 | 1287 |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 27.3% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 22.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |
Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 47.0 (#150), Grok 4.5: 54.5 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | 1439 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1347 | 1497 |
| LMArena French | 1368 | 1458 |
| LMArena German | 1362 | 1448 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1425 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1402 |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | 1447 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1348 | 1452 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 70.8 (#155), Grok 4.5: 76.3 (#45)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | 1446 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#288), Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | 1463 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads
Gemma 3 27B: 52.7 (#161), Grok 4.5: 65.9 (#40)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | 1448 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | 1442 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | 1579 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1344 | 1457 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 27B better than Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.5?
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Gemma 3 27B or Grok 4.5 better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.7 versus 22.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.5 does, with 500K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Grok 4.5 share?
28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.5 has 52.