Gemma 3 27B wins more areas, narrowly.
Scores updated · 13 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the two areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
Reasoning rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 13 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
Images and chartsGemma 3 27B
Other results10 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- OCRBench (Acc)Kimi VL A3B Thinking by 111 rating points753864+111 rating
- MATH-VisionGemma 3 27B by 9.24636.8+9.2
- MMLUKimi VL A3B Thinking by 5.176.982+5.1
- MMBench-EN-v1.1 (Acc)Gemma 3 27B by 2.978.976+2.9
- MATHKimi VL A3B Thinking by 2.88991.8+2.8
- MMVet (Acc)Gemma 3 27B by 1.57169.5+1.5
- RealWorldQA (Acc)Kimi VL A3B Thinking by 1.562.564+1.5
- MathVision (full) (Pass@1)Kimi VL A3B Thinking by 1.335.536.8+1.3
- MMStar (Acc)Kimi VL A3B Thinking by 1.163.164.2+1.1
- MMLU-Protie67.668.5tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemma 3 27B or Kimi VL A3B Thinking?
Gemma 3 27B wins one of the two areas where both have results: images and charts. Kimi VL A3B Thinking wins none. They are level on reasoning.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 13 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 3 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 10 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.