+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Gemma 3 4B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads with 20.4% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite offers 852.0K more tokens in context window than Gemma 3 4B. 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 4B was developed as a compact yet capable open-source model, designed to strike a balance between performance and resource efficiency. Built with 4 billion parameters and instruction tuning, it provides a practical option for applications requiring moderate capability with manageable computational costs.
3 months newer
Gemma 3 4B
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 4B
Input:$0.02
Output:$0.04($0.44 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 5 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Average Score:54.8%(+20.4%)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Average Score:34.4%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3 4B
2024-08-01
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 4B
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Avg Score:54.8%(+20.4%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Avg Score:34.4%
Providers:1