Model Comparison
Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3 30B A3BWhich is better in 2026?
Qwen3 30B A3B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3 27B is 1.2x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3 30B A3B — which is better?
Gemma 3 27B (by Google) and Qwen3 30B A3B (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 30B A3B is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, LiveCodeBench). Qwen3 30B A3B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, Gemma 3 27B is roughly 1.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Gemma 3 27B also accepts a larger context window (131,072 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Gemma 3 27B if…
- cost matters — it's about 1.2x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 131,072 token context window
Choose Qwen3 30B A3B if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 2 of 2 shared benchmarks
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2025
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Gemma 3 27B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 30B A3B is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, LiveCodeBench).
Qwen3 30B A3B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.10/1M tokens) costs the same as Qwen3 30B A3B ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemma 3 27B ($0.20/1M tokens) is 1.5x cheaper than Qwen3 30B A3B ($0.30/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3 30B A3B is more expensive than Gemma 3 27B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3 30B A3B has 3.5B more parameters than Gemma 3 27B, making it 13.0% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Gemma 3 27B accepts 131,072 input tokens compared to Qwen3 30B A3B's 128,000 tokens. Gemma 3 27B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Qwen3 30B A3B is limited to 128,000 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Gemma 3 27B supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3 30B A3B does not.
Gemma 3 27B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Gemma 3 27B
Qwen3 30B A3B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemma 3 27B is licensed under Gemma, while Qwen3 30B A3B uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Gemma
Open weights
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemma 3 27B was released on 2025-03-12, while Qwen3 30B A3B was released on 2025-04-29.
Qwen3 30B A3B is 2 months newer than Gemma 3 27B.
Mar 12, 2025
1.3 years ago
Apr 29, 2025
1.1 years ago
1mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Gemma 3 27B is available from DeepInfra, Novita. Qwen3 30B A3B is available from DeepInfra, Novita, Fireworks.
Gemma 3 27B
Qwen3 30B A3B
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Gemma 3 27B
View details
Qwen3 30B A3B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 3 27B vs Qwen3 30B A3B.