token.app › Compare › Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3.5-Flash
Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen3.5-Flash
Qwen3.5-Flash leads on 2 of 2 shared benchmarks. Qwen3.5-Flash is 5.7× cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 basis. Qwen3.5-Flash accepts the larger context window (1M).
Head to head
Blended price uses a 3:1 input:output mix
| Gemma 2 27B | Qwen3.5-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba | |
| Input $/1M | $0.650 | $0.065 |
| Output $/1M | $0.650 | $0.260 |
| Blended $/1M | $0.650 | $0.114 |
| Context window | 8K | 1M |
| Max output | 2K | 66K |
| Released | Jul 2024 | Feb 2026 |
| Licence | Open weights | Proprietary |
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | 82.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 1.4% | 84.4% |
Benchmark scores independently run and published by Epoch AI, 'AI Benchmarking Hub', used under CC BY 4.0. Only benchmarks with a score for BOTH models are compared.
Choose Gemma 2 27B if…
- Open weights — self-hostable
Choose Qwen3.5-Flash if…
- Costs less per token — $0.114 vs $0.650 blended
- Higher GPQA Diamond (82.3% vs 36.5%)
- Higher OTIS Mock AIME (84.4% vs 1.4%)
- Larger context window (1M)
- Newer model (released Feb 2026)
FAQ
Which is better, Gemma 2 27B or Qwen3.5-Flash?
Across the 2 benchmarks both models have independently-run scores for, Gemma 2 27B leads on 0 and Qwen3.5-Flash leads on 2. Benchmarks are one input — price and context window are on this page too.
Is Gemma 2 27B cheaper than Qwen3.5-Flash?
Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper: $0.114 versus $0.650 per million tokens blended at 3:1 input:output. Input alone: $0.650 vs $0.065. Output alone: $0.650 vs $0.260.
What context windows do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-Flash have?
Gemma 2 27B: 8,192 tokens. Qwen3.5-Flash: 1,000,000 tokens.
Who makes Gemma 2 27B and Qwen3.5-Flash?
Gemma 2 27B is made by Google. Qwen3.5-Flash is made by Alibaba.