Auto-generated comparison

Google: Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct

Google: Gemma 3 27B wins on 3 of 6 axes — pricing and capability skew in its favour for most workloads.

Side-by-side comparison

CapabilityGoogle: Gemma 3 27BQwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B InstructWinner
Context window
Maximum number of input tokens the model can attend to in a single request.
131K128K🏆 Google: Gemma 3 27B
Input price (per 1M)
Cost per million input tokens billed by the provider.
$0.08$0.20🏆 Google: Gemma 3 27B
Output price (per 1M)
Cost per million output tokens billed by the provider.
$0.16$0.60🏆 Google: Gemma 3 27B
Tool / function calling
First-class support for emitting structured tool calls.
Tie
Vision input
Accepts image inputs alongside text.
YesYesTie
Reasoning mode
Internal chain-of-thought / extended-thinking support.
Tie

Frequently asked questions

Is Google: Gemma 3 27B better than Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Google: Gemma 3 27B wins on 3 of 6 axes — pricing and capability skew in its favour for most workloads.

What's the price difference between Google: Gemma 3 27B and Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct?

Input: $0.08 vs $0.20 per 1M tokens. Output: $0.16 vs $0.60 per 1M tokens.

What context windows do Google: Gemma 3 27B and Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct support?

Google: Gemma 3 27B supports up to 131K tokens. Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct supports up to 128K tokens.

Do both Google: Gemma 3 27B and Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct support tool calling?

Google: Gemma 3 27B: not advertised. Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct: not advertised.

Compare Google: Gemma 3 27B with other models

Compare Qwen: Qwen2.5 VL 32B Instruct with other models