Okay, you want details. You got ’em. This review focuses on the Gemma 3 27B model, available for free under aistudio.google.com, just choose that Gemma 3 27B model!,… specifically, and compares it to the current heavy hitters: Gemini (specifically Gemini 1.5 Pro), ChatGPT-4, Bing Copilot (powered by GPT-4), and Claude 3 Opus. It’s important to note that Gemma is an open-weights model, meaning it’s designed for developers and customization, while the others are closed-source, commercially available services. This fundamentally impacts the comparison. I’ll break it down into sections: Reasoning, Creativity, Coding, Speed/Cost, and Overall Impression.
Info: Just disable all of those “Security Settings” on the right panel to let all the “warnings” go away.. 🎓
Important Caveats:
-
Access: I’m evaluating based on publicly available information, benchmarks, and my own interactions with the models through their respective interfaces. Direct, controlled A/B testing is difficult.
-
Variations: Each service (ChatGPT, Bing, Claude) has different tiers and access levels. I’m generally referencing the highest tier available (ChatGPT-4, Claude 3 Opus).
-
Gemma’s Nature: Gemma is meant to be fine-tuned. The “out of the box” performance is a baseline. A fine-tuned Gemma can significantly outperform its initial state.
1. Reasoning & General Knowledge:
-
Gemma 3 27B: Surprisingly strong for its size. It demonstrates solid reasoning abilities, particularly in areas where it has seen sufficient training data. It’s noticeably better than the original Gemma 2B and 7B models. However, it does occasionally exhibit factual inaccuracies (“hallucinations”) more frequently than the closed-source models. It struggles with complex, multi-step reasoning problems that require deep contextual understanding.
-
Gemini 1.5 Pro: The clear leader here. Its massive context window (1 million tokens!) allows it to handle incredibly complex reasoning tasks and retain information over extended conversations. Factual accuracy is very high.
-
ChatGPT-4: Excellent reasoning, though its context window is smaller than Gemini 1.5 Pro. It’s generally very reliable and excels at tasks requiring common sense and nuanced understanding.
-
Claude 3 Opus: Very close to ChatGPT-4 in reasoning ability. Claude 3 is particularly strong at avoiding harmful responses and maintaining a consistent persona. It’s often preferred for tasks requiring ethical considerations.
-
Bing Copilot (GPT-4): Essentially ChatGPT-4 with web access. Reasoning is on par with ChatGPT-4, but the added ability to search the web provides a significant advantage for current events and information gathering.
Verdict (Reasoning): Gemini 1.5 Pro > ChatGPT-4/Claude 3 Opus > Gemma 3 27B > Bing Copilot. Gemma is respectable, but lags behind the commercial giants.
2. Creativity & Writing:
-
Gemma 3 27B: Capable of generating creative text formats (poems, code, scripts, musical pieces, email, letters, etc.). The quality is good, but often lacks the polish and originality of the top-tier models. It can be a bit repetitive at times. It’s good at following instructions for style and tone, but less adept at truly innovative writing.
-
Gemini 1.5 Pro: Strong creative writing capabilities, benefiting from its vast knowledge base. It can generate diverse and engaging content.
-
ChatGPT-4: The gold standard for creative writing. It’s incredibly versatile and can adapt to a wide range of styles and tones. It excels at storytelling, poetry, and scriptwriting.
-
Claude 3 Opus: Excellent at creative writing, particularly long-form content. It’s known for its ability to maintain a consistent narrative voice and create compelling characters.
-
Bing Copilot (GPT-4): Creative writing is similar to ChatGPT-4, but the web access can be used to incorporate current trends and information into the generated content.
Verdict (Creativity): ChatGPT-4 > Claude 3 Opus > Gemini 1.5 Pro > Gemma 3 27B > Bing Copilot. Gemma is a decent creative writer, but lacks the finesse of the others.
3. Coding:
-
Gemma 3 27B: Surprisingly competent at coding, especially considering its size. It can generate code in multiple languages, debug existing code, and explain code snippets. However, it sometimes produces code with subtle errors or inefficiencies. It’s best suited for simpler coding tasks.
-
Gemini 1.5 Pro: Very strong coding abilities, particularly with Python and JavaScript. Its large context window is a huge advantage for working with large codebases.
-
ChatGPT-4: Excellent coding assistant. It can generate complex code, translate between languages, and provide detailed explanations. It’s a favorite among developers.
-
Claude 3 Opus: Good at coding, but generally considered slightly less proficient than ChatGPT-4 and Gemini 1.5 Pro. It excels at code documentation and understanding complex code structures.
-
Bing Copilot (GPT-4): Coding abilities are on par with ChatGPT-4. The web access can be used to find relevant documentation and examples.
Verdict (Coding): Gemini 1.5 Pro/ChatGPT-4 > Claude 3 Opus > Gemma 3 27B > Bing Copilot. Gemma is a capable coder, but needs more refinement for complex projects.
4. Speed & Cost:
-
Gemma 3 27B: This is where Gemma shines. Because it’s open-weights, you control the infrastructure. Once deployed, inference can be very fast and cost-effective, especially with optimized hardware. The initial cost is the hardware and engineering effort to deploy it.
-
Gemini 1.5 Pro: Access is through the Google AI Studio or Vertex AI. Cost is based on token usage, and can be significant for large inputs/outputs. Speed is generally good, but can vary depending on demand.
-
ChatGPT-4: Subscription-based (ChatGPT Plus) or API access. Cost is based on token usage. Speed can be slow during peak hours.
-
Claude 3 Opus: API access with pay-per-token pricing. Cost is comparable to ChatGPT-4. Speed is generally good.
-
Bing Copilot (GPT-4): Free (with limitations) or subscription-based (Copilot Pro). Speed is generally good.
Verdict (Speed/Cost): Gemma 3 27B > Bing Copilot > Claude 3 Opus/ChatGPT-4 > Gemini 1.5 Pro. Gemma’s open-weights nature gives it a massive advantage in cost and potential speed after deployment.
5. Overall Impression:
Gemma 3 27B is a remarkable achievement for an open-weights model. It punches above its weight class in many areas, demonstrating strong reasoning, creativity, and coding abilities. However, it consistently falls short of the performance of the closed-source giants like Gemini 1.5 Pro, ChatGPT-4, and Claude 3 Opus.
Who is Gemma for?
-
Developers: Those who want to customize and fine-tune a powerful language model for specific tasks.
-
Researchers: Those who want to experiment with and understand the inner workings of large language models.
-
Organizations with specific data privacy requirements: Because you control the infrastructure, you have complete control over your data.
Who are the others for?
-
General users: ChatGPT, Bing Copilot, and Claude are easier to use and provide excellent performance out of the box.
-
Businesses: Gemini, ChatGPT, and Claude offer robust APIs and enterprise-level support.
Final Score (out of 10):
-
Gemma 3 27B: 7.5/10 (Potential for 8.5-9/10 with fine-tuning)
-
Gemini 1.5 Pro: 9.5/10
-
ChatGPT-4: 9/10
-
Bing Copilot (GPT-4): 8.5/10
-
Claude 3 Opus: 9/10