ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3 30B A3B vs Gemma 3 27B IT vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 71 to 60 and 58 on our weighted score, though Gemma 3 27B IT is 37% cheaper per token.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 30B A3B

    Released Apr 28, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI136.2
    • Price$0.114 / $0.50
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 30B A3B

  2. Google

    Gemma 3 27B IT

    Released Mar 12, 2025

    60/100
    • ECI130.0
    • Price$0.08 / $0.20
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 3 27B IT
  3. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    71/100
    • ECI133.9
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against Gemma 3 27B IT (60) and Qwen3 30B A3B (58). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 30B A3B wins on capability. Gemma 3 27B IT wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3 30B A3BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 133.9 · Gemma 3 27B IT 130.0
  • Lowest priceGemma 3 27B ITGemma 3 27B IT $0.11 · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite $0.175 · Qwen3 30B A3B $0.21 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Qwen3 30B A3B 131,072 · Gemma 3 27B IT 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3 30B A3B: Text · Gemma 3 27B IT: Text, Images · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3 30B A3B and Gemma 3 27B ITPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 30B A3BGemma 3 27B ITGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%615358
Price25%829586
Inputs & features15%3550100
Context window10%242461
Overall100%58/10060/10071/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3 30B A3B vs Gemma 3 27B IT vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen)Gemma 3 27B ITGoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)136.2 (best)130.0133.9
ECI rank#112 of 148 (best)#125 of 148#118 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions61.7% (best)47.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics62.8% (best)22.5%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.114$0.08 (best)$0.10
Output$0.50$0.20 (best)$0.40
Cached input——$0.01
Blended (3:1)$0.21$0.11 (best)$0.175
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 8 providersMedian of 9 providersOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens131,072 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoYes
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenProprietary
API model ID——gemini-2.5-flash-lite
API providers81020 (best)
ReleasedApr 28, 2025Mar 12, 2025Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Aug 2024Jan 2025
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$2.14
  • Gemma 3 27B IT$1.20
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite$1.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 30B A3B, Gemma 3 27B IT or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against Gemma 3 27B IT (60) and Qwen3 30B A3B (58). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 30B A3B wins on capability. Gemma 3 27B IT wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B A3B, Gemma 3 27B IT or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemma 3 27B IT is cheaper at $0.08 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 9 API providers). Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Google API price); Qwen3 30B A3B costs $0.114 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 8 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.11 per million tokens for Gemma 3 27B IT versus $0.175 for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (1.6× as much) and $0.21 for Qwen3 30B A3B (1.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3 30B A3B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 (#112 of 148), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 133.9 (#118 of 148) and Gemma 3 27B IT 130.0 (#125 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (130.3–138.7 vs 129.8–136.3), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 30B A3B, Gemma 3 27B IT and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3 30B A3B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 30B A3B and 131,072 for Gemma 3 27B IT. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 30B A3B up to 16,384, Gemma 3 27B IT up to 131,072, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 30B A3B accepts text; Gemma 3 27B IT accepts text and images; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 30B A3B and Gemma 3 27B IT publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Qwen3 30B A3B came out Apr 28, 2025; Gemma 3 27B IT came out Mar 12, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemma 3 27B IT Aug 2024, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Jan 2025.

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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons