Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
MiniMax M2.7 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 57 to 30. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiniMax M2.7's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 57 against 35.
MiniMax M2.7 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 3 27B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. MiniMax M2.7 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 32K for Gemma 3 27B.
Pick MiniMax M2.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 3 27B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Gemma 3 27B
35
MiniMax M2.7
57
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
MiniMax M2.7 is ahead overall, 57 to 30.
MiniMax M2.7 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 57 versus 35. Gemma 3 27B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.