+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 27B vs Gemma 3 4B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemma 3 27B leads with 12.5% higher average benchmark score. Both models have similar pricing. Overall, Gemma 3 27B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
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.
+
+
+
+
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.
Launched on the same date
Gemma 3 27B
2025-03-12
Gemma 3 4B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.20
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Input:$0.02
Output:$0.04($0.24 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 26 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Average Score:65.4%(+12.5%)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Average Score:53.0%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3 4B
2024-08-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
2 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 33 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
Novita
Throughput: 33 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Avg Score:65.4%(+12.5%)
Providers:2
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Avg Score:53.0%
Providers:1