+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 3 12B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads with 8.4% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite offers 794.6K more tokens in context window than Gemma 3 12B. Both models have similar pricing. Overall, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite was created as an even more efficient variant of Gemini 2.0 Flash, designed for applications where minimal latency and maximum cost-effectiveness are essential. Built to bring next-generation multimodal capabilities to resource-constrained deployments, it optimizes for speed and affordability.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B was developed as part of the third generation of Google's open-source model family, designed to provide enhanced capabilities in a mid-sized format. Built with improved architecture and training techniques, it balances performance with practical deployment considerations for diverse use cases.
1 month newer
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
2025-02-05
Gemma 3 12B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Input:$0.07
Output:$0.30
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B
Input:$0.05
Output:$0.10($0.22 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 8 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Average Score:63.3%(+8.4%)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B
Average Score:54.9%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
2024-06-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
1 providers
Throughput: 85 tok/s
Latency: 0.7ms
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Avg Score:63.3%(+8.4%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 12B
Avg Score:54.9%
Providers:1