+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 3 27B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads with 8.4% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite offers 852.0K more tokens in context window than Gemma 3 27B. Both models have similar pricing. Overall, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite was created as the most efficient option in the Gemini 2.5 family, designed to provide cutting-edge capabilities with minimal computational overhead. Built for applications where cost and latency are primary concerns, it extends advanced multimodal understanding to resource-conscious deployments.
+
+
+
+
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.
3 months newer
Gemma 3 27B
2025-03-12
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
2025-06-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.40
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.20($0.20 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 5 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Average Score:54.8%(+8.4%)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Average Score:46.4%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
2025-01-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
1 providers
Throughput: 5.69 tok/s
Latency: 0.44ms
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Avg Score:54.8%(+8.4%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Avg Score:46.4%
Providers:2