+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct leads with 1.8% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3 27B offers 6.1K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available on 5 providers. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
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.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B was developed as a flagship-tier open-source model, designed to provide advanced capabilities with 90 billion parameters. Built to serve applications requiring high-quality reasoning and generation, it represents a powerful option within the Llama 3.2 series for demanding tasks.
5 months newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Gemma 3 27B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.20($0.45 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input:$0.35
Output:$0.40
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 6 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 27B
Average Score:74.3%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Average Score:76.0%(+1.8%)
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:74.3%
Providers:2
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:76.0%(+1.8%)
Providers:5