Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct comes out ahead, 39 to 28 on our weighted score, though Gemma 2 27B is 13% cheaper per token.
GoogleGemma 2 27B
28/100- ECI122.1
- Price$0.65 / $0.65
- Context8K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct
39/100- ECI—
- Price$0.66 / $1.00
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is our pick
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 39/100 against Gemma 2 27B (28). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Gemma 2 27B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceGemma 2 27BGemma 2 27B $0.65 · Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct $0.745 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen2.5-Coder-32B-InstructQwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct 131,072 · Gemma 2 27B 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGemma 2 27B: Text · Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 56 | 54 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 0 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 28/100 | 39/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Gemma 2 27BGoogle | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 122.1 | — |
| ECI rank | #152 of 165 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 36.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 1.4% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.65 (best) | $0.66 |
| Output | $0.65 (best) | $1.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.65 (best) | $0.745 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Median of 7 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 8,192 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 2,048 tokens | 8,192 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 3 | 7 (best) |
| Released | Jul 13, 2024 | Nov 12, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 30, 2024 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Gemma 2 27B$7.80
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct$8.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Gemma 2 27B or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 39/100 against Gemma 2 27B (28). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Gemma 2 27B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct?
Gemma 2 27B is cheaper at $0.65 input / $0.65 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct costs $0.66 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 7 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.65 per million tokens for Gemma 2 27B versus $0.745 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Gemma 2 27B has an ECI of 122.1 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemma 2 27B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Gemma 2 27B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 8,192 for Gemma 2 27B. Maximum output per response: Gemma 2 27B up to 2,048, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Gemma 2 27B accepts text; Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct is the newest, released Nov 12, 2024. Gemma 2 27B came out Jul 13, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Gemma 2 27B Jun 30, 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Mistral LargeThree-way comparison
- Gemma 2 27B vs Mistral LargeMistral AI · ECI 122.0
- Gemma 2 27B vs Llama-3.1-70B-InstructMeta · ECI 125.9
- Gemma 2 27B vs Claude Haiku 3Anthropic · ECI 118.8
- Gemma 2 27B vs GPT-4o miniOpenAI · ECI 126.5
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct vs Aya Expanse 32BCohere
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct vs Hermes 3 70B InstructNous Research
