Skip to content
ModelCap

Model decision surface

Compare AI models

Start with Gemma 3 27B and Phi mini MoE instruct, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.

Current public data

Gemma 3 27B vs Phi mini MoE instruct

Live dataset updated 9/22/2026, 9:31:46 PM UTC

Open 1200×630 evidence receipt
Factual comparison of Gemma 3 27B and Phi mini MoE instruct
Field
ModelCap position#127#126
Index score43.744.2
EvidenceMeasured2 public benchmark observations across 2 boardsEstimatedglobal-corpus-prior over 208 held-out anchors (68%); launch card against 4 resolved peers on 3 rows (32%); exceeds every named peer on 3 of 3 rows; optimism haircut 6.91 from cross-lab-probe; shrunk 27 up toward the measured corpus
Input / 1M$0.08Unavailable
Output / 1M$0.45Unavailable
Pricing statusfreshunavailable
Context131K—
Providers40
Weight accessGated accessOpen weights

Decision facts

  • Gemma 3 27B is #127; Phi mini MoE instruct is #126 on the same current language board.
  • Index scores are 43.7 for Gemma 3 27B and 44.2 for Phi mini MoE instruct. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
  • Evidence differs: Gemma 3 27B is Measured; Phi mini MoE instruct is Estimated.
  • Weight access differs: Gemma 3 27B is gated; Phi mini MoE instruct is open.
  • ModelCap currently lists 4 providers for Gemma 3 27B and 0 for Phi mini MoE instruct.

These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.

Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.