Qwen3.5 9B vs Gemma 3 27B IT
Qwen3.5 9B comes out ahead, 72 to 60 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 9B
72/100- ECI139.5
- Price$0.10 / $0.15
- Context262K
GoogleGemma 3 27B IT
60/100- ECI130.0
- Price$0.08 / $0.20
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen3.5 9B is our pick
Qwen3.5 9B is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Gemma 3 27B IT (60). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.5 9BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 9B 139.5 · Gemma 3 27B IT 130.0
- Lowest priceGemma 3 27B ITGemma 3 27B IT $0.11 · Qwen3.5 9B $0.113 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 9BQwen3.5 9B 262,144 · Gemma 3 27B IT 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 9BQwen3.5 9B: Text, Images, Video · Gemma 3 27B IT: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.5 9B | Gemma 3 27B IT |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 65 | 53 |
| Price | 25% | 95 | 95 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 50 |
| Context window | 10% | 37 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 72/100 | 60/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.5 9BAlibaba (Qwen) | Gemma 3 27B ITGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 139.5 (best) | 130.0 |
| ECI rank | #101 of 148 (best) | #125 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 79.0% (best) | 47.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 61.7% (best) | 22.5% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.08 (best) |
| Output | $0.15 (best) | $0.20 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.113 | $0.11 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 14 providers | Median of 9 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 15 (best) | 10 |
| Released | Feb 23, 2026 | Mar 12, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Aug 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen3.5 9B$1.30
- Gemma 3 27B IT$1.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.5 9B or Gemma 3 27B IT?
Qwen3.5 9B is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Gemma 3 27B IT (60). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5 9B or Gemma 3 27B IT?
Gemma 3 27B IT is cheaper at $0.08 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 9 API providers). Qwen3.5 9B costs $0.10 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.11 per million tokens for Gemma 3 27B IT versus $0.113 for Qwen3.5 9B (1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3.5 9B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 9B 139.5 (#101 of 148) and Gemma 3 27B IT 130.0 (#125 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (136.5–141.3 vs 124.1–132.2), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 9B 79.0%, Gemma 3 27B IT 47.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.5 9B 61.7%, Gemma 3 27B IT 22.5%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 9B and Gemma 3 27B IT yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 9B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 9B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for Gemma 3 27B IT. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 9B up to 65,536, Gemma 3 27B IT up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.5 9B accepts text, images and video; Gemma 3 27B IT accepts text and images. Qwen3.5 9B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 9B is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. Gemma 3 27B IT came out Mar 12, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemma 3 27B IT Aug 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add GPT-5 NanoThree-way comparison
- Qwen3.5 9B vs GPT-5 NanoOpenAI · ECI 139.4
- Qwen3.5 9B vs Gemma 4 26B A4B ITGoogle · ECI 141.9
- Qwen3.5 9B vs DeepSeek V4 FlashDeepSeek · ECI 146.1
- Qwen3.5 9B vs Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI · ECI 131.7
- Gemma 3 27B IT vs Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI · ECI 131.7
- Gemma 3 27B IT vs Llama 4 Scout 17B InstructMeta · ECI 129.7
