Gemma 27B vs Llama 70B?

Llama 70B is significantly better but needs 40GB+ VRAM. Gemma 27B is the best you can run on a 16GB card like RTX 4070 Ti Super.

Which has better coding performance?

Llama 3 is better for coding at all sizes. Gemma is more balanced toward general reasoning.

Gemma 2 9B runs well on gaming laptops with 8GB+ VRAM. Gemma 2 2B can even run on integrated graphics.

Model ComparisonUpdated December 2025

Google vs Meta open-weight models

Quick VerdictTie

At same parameter counts, Llama edges out. But Gemma 27B punches above its weight and fits in 16GB VRAM.

Choose Gemma 27B if you have 16-24GB VRAM and want quality exceeding Llama 8B.

Choose Llama if you need long context, or want to scale up to 70B/405B later.

Gemma 2 from Google offers competitive performance in smaller packages. Here's how it compares to Meta's Llama 3.

Category	Gemma 2 27B	Llama 3.1 8B	Winner
MMLU (27B vs 8B)	75.2%	69.4%	Gemma 2 27B
Coding	68.0%	72.6%	Llama 3.1 8B
Context Length	8K	128K	Llama 3.1 8B
VRAM (Q4)	~15GB	~6GB	Llama 3.1 8B
Size/Quality Ratio	Excellent	Good	Gemma 2 27B

Gemma 2 27B

by Google

Consumer GPU usersWhen 27B is enoughEfficient inference

Llama 3.1 8B

by Meta

Long context tasksWhen you need the Llama ecosystem

Llama vs Mistral

Phi vs Llama

Check our GPU buying guides to find the right hardware for running LLMs locally.

Specification

Gemma 2 27B

Llama 3.1 8B

Developer

Google