Gemma 3 27B vs Muse Wonder
Compare Gemma 3 27B and Muse Wonder side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Gemma 3 27B vs Muse Wonder live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Muse Wonder Comparison Table
Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 13, 2026
| Property | Gemma 3 27B | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Meta | |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2025 | Oct 2026 |
| Context Window | 128K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | undisclosed |
| License | Custom | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | See license terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.080 | $4.00 |
| Output $/1M | $0.450 | $20.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Supported | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Not listed | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | Not evaluated | 78.8% |
| Avg cost / sample | – | $0.034 |
| Avg speed / sample | – | 11.68s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | – | 65.1% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.5 to 66.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 66.0% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.5 |
| Counting (low) | – | 76.6% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 78.4 |
| Counting (high) | – | 79.7% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1 |
| Identification (low) | – | 92.7% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8 |
| Identification (high) | – | 90.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6 |
| OCR (low) | – | 74.3% |
| by category |
| |
| OCR (high) | – | 76.0% |
| by category |
| |
| Reasoning (low) | – | 85.2% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.8 to 85.4 |
| Reasoning (high) | – | 83.4% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.1 |
Gemma 3 27B vs Muse Wonder: Overview
Gemma 3 27B, announced on March 12, 2025, is the largest open-weight model in Google DeepMind’s Gemma 3 family. With around 27 billion parameters, it is multimodal—accepting both text and images as input and producing text outputs. It supports a 128,000-token context window and typically generates up to ~8,192 tokens, enabling it to process multi-page documents, extended conversations, or large batches of images in a single prompt.
The model is instruction-tuned in its “-it” variants for chat, reasoning, and summarization use cases, and it supports structured outputs and function calling. It is multilingual, covering over 140 languages. Deployment is flexible: the full BF16 model requires ~46 GB of VRAM, but quantization-aware training (QAT) versions in 8-bit or 4-bit reduce the footprint significantly, allowing more accessible use outside large-scale clusters. While it delivers stronger reasoning and multimodal performance than smaller Gemma models, it remains lighter and more open than proprietary systems, making it well-suited for research, development, and fine-tuned applications.
Muse Wonder is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta, released on October 12, 2026 as the first step past the Muse Spark line on Meta's scaling ladder. It launched together with Muse Wonder Full, a larger configuration that is available only through Muse Code subscription plans, while Muse Wonder itself is served through the Meta Model API under the identifier muse-wonder-1.0. The model accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents as input and returns text, with a context window of 1,048,576 tokens and graded reasoning effort settings. Meta trained both models at its Prometheus data center on larger base models than Muse Spark 1.3, and attributes their gains on unfamiliar tasks to post-training that transfers more effectively from a stronger base.
Meta positions Muse Wonder for long-running personal and professional agents: it plans multi-step work, delegates to sub-agents, calls tools in parallel, recovers from errors, and operates browsers and desktop or mobile applications. Two training objectives shape this behaviour. Active Memory carries goals, constraints, and earlier decisions across conversations and retrieves the details relevant to the current step, and Active Focus keeps the model trying alternative approaches when a task gets difficult while asking for clarification before important actions. Visual inputs such as screenshots, charts, and video feed the same reasoning loop, and the model emits bounding box coordinates for grounding queries. Meta's model card lists visual and spatial reasoning, especially 3D tasks, as a known limitation and recommends validating performance for applications that depend on precise spatial understanding.
Frequently Asked Questions
Gemma 3 27B has not yet been evaluated on Roboflow's current Vision Evals, so this comparison shows specs, licensing, and pricing rather than benchmark scores.
Gemma 3 27B is released under Custom, while Muse Wonder uses Proprietary. In practice: Muse Wonder — commercial use per vendor terms. Licensing often matters more than raw accuracy for commercial deployments, so check the terms against how you plan to ship.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.