ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 vs Gemma 3 27B IT

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 59, Gemma 3 27B IT 57). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    59/100
    • ECI137.3
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507

  2. Google

    Gemma 3 27B IT

    Released Mar 12, 2025

    57/100
    • ECI129.9
    • Price$0.11 / $0.30
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 3 27B IT

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 59/100, Gemma 3 27B IT 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 137.3 · Gemma 3 27B IT 129.9
  • Lowest priceQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 $0.15 · Gemma 3 27B IT $0.157 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 262,144 · Gemma 3 27B IT 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemma 3 27B ITQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507: Text · Gemma 3 27B IT: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Gemma 3 27B IT
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6152
Price25%8584
Inputs & features15%2550
Context window10%3725
Overall100%59/10057/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 vs Gemma 3 27B IT specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Alibaba (Qwen)Gemma 3 27B ITGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)137.3 (best)129.9
ECI rank#124 of 165 (best)#137 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions55.6% (best)47.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics62.2% (best)22.5%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.11
Output$0.30$0.30 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.15 (best)$0.157
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 12 providersMedian of 16 providers
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output16,384 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenApache 2.0Open
API model ID——
API providers1417 (best)
ReleasedJul 28, 2025Mar 12, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Aug 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507$1.60
  • Gemma 3 27B IT$1.69
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 or Gemma 3 27B IT?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 59/100, Gemma 3 27B IT 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 or Gemma 3 27B IT?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (median across 12 API providers). Gemma 3 27B IT costs $0.11 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (median across 16 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 versus $0.157 for Gemma 3 27B IT (1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 137.3 (#124 of 165) and Gemma 3 27B IT 129.9 (#137 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (131.7–139.4 vs 124.2–132.1), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 55.6%, Gemma 3 27B IT 47.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 62.2%, Gemma 3 27B IT 22.5%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 and Gemma 3 27B IT yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for Gemma 3 27B IT. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 up to 16,384, Gemma 3 27B IT up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 accepts text; Gemma 3 27B IT accepts text and images. Gemma 3 27B IT handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Gemma 3 27B IT came out Mar 12, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemma 3 27B IT Aug 2024.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons