Gemma 3 27B · GPQA diamond · Best score (across scorers) · % ↗
Google / MODEL EVIDENCE
Gemma 3 27B
14 benchmarks · 17 observations · 14 sources
Scores at a glance
14 benchmarks · large dot: Gemma 3 27B; small dots: closest models where reported
Gemma 3 27B · MATH level 5 · Best score (across scorers) · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · Best score (across scorers) · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · Aider coding benchmarks · Polyglot · percent correct ↗
Gemma 3 27B · Fiction.LiveBench · 16k token score · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · GeoBench · ACW Country % · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · Lech Mazur Writing · Mean rubric score / 10 ↗
Gemma 3 27B · CritPt · Accuracy · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · LMCA · Score · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · DTBench · Accuracy · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · LiveBench · Global average · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · SciCode · Score · % ↗
Gemma 3 27B · General ECI · 26 October 2026 fit ↗
Gemma 3 27B · LiveCodeBench Pro · Elo rating · human contest calibration ↗
3 more reported results
0% · Gemma 3 27B · LiveCodeBench Pro · Hard · pass@1 · difficulty breakdown · LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming? ↗
0% · Gemma 3 27B · LiveCodeBench Pro · Medium · pass@1 · difficulty breakdown · LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming? ↗
8.5% · Gemma 3 27B · LiveCodeBench Pro · Easy · pass@1 · difficulty breakdown · LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming? ↗
Closest models by score
Similar positions on shared benchmark leaderboards. Smaller gaps are closer.
3 of 3 shared benchmark comparisons
3 of 3 shared benchmark comparisons
3 of 3 shared benchmark comparisons
How similarity is measured
Mean absolute gap in percentile positions on shared benchmark settings; lower is closer. At least 60% overlap is required, with a minimum of three when available. Independent evaluations are used when there are at least three; otherwise published report comparisons are used. Repeated model observations within one setting are averaged before ranking. Writing-style traits and composite indices are excluded. This describes similarity, not an overall quality ranking.
Sources
Every plotted observation links to its evaluation. Reported configurations, benchmark versions and task subsets can differ; similarity describes shared scores, not training lift.
- Aider LLM Leaderboards — Polyglot coding benchmark ↗
- SciCode Benchmark | Artificial Analysis ↗
- LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming? — published result table ↗
All 19 authors
Zihan Zheng, Zerui Cheng, Zeyu Shen, Shang Zhou, Kaiyuan Liu, Hansen He, Dongruixuan Li, Stanley Wei, Hangyi Hao, Jianzhu Yao, Peiyao Sheng, Zixuan Wang, Wenhao Chai, Aleksandra Korolova, Peter Henderson, Sanjeev Arora, Pramod Viswanath, Jingbo Shang, Saining Xie
- DTBench — Conceptual Reasoning Index ↗
- LMCA — Conceptual Reasoning Index ↗
- CritPt v1 ↗
- GPQA Diamond ↗
- MATH Level 5 ↗
- OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 ↗
- AI benchmarks & capabilities ↗
- Fiction.liveBench — March 14, 2025 benchmark release ↗
- GeoBench — GeoGuessr model benchmark ↗
- Writing benchmark — incorporating mandatory story elements ↗
- LiveBench — model evaluation leaderboard ↗
Release dates reported by sources
2025-03-11 · 2025-03-12
Names used in source tables
Gemma 3 27B