+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 1.5 Flash vs Gemma 3 27B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemma 3 27B leads with 5.7% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 1.5 Flash offers 794.6K more tokens in context window than Gemma 3 27B. Both models have similar pricing. Overall, Gemma 3 27B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash was created as a fast and efficient multimodal model, designed to provide quick responses while handling text, images, and other modalities. Built for applications requiring low latency and high throughput, it balances capability with speed to serve real-time and high-volume use cases.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B represents the largest variant in the Gemma 3 family, developed to provide flagship-level open-source capabilities. Built with advanced training methodologies and 27 billion parameters, it offers researchers and developers access to powerful language understanding without proprietary restrictions.
10 months newer
Gemini 1.5 Flash
2024-05-01
Gemma 3 27B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.60
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.20($0.45 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 8 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Average Score:71.2%
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Average Score:76.9%(+5.7%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemini 1.5 Flash
2023-11-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
1 providers
Throughput: 150 tok/s
Latency: 0.3ms
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Avg Score:71.2%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Avg Score:76.9%(+5.7%)
Providers:2