Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Gemma 3 vs Llama 4 Scout

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Revisado por el equipo de investigación de GetInfoUsÚltima revisión: October 2026Política editorial
Compartir
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Gemma 3 vs Llama 4 Scout: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Gemma 3 by Google and Llama 4 Scout by Meta represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, both models offer identical input token rates. On output generation, costs are matched. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, Llama 4 Scout provides an expanded memory horizon with 3,500K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemma 3 leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.

Comparación Directa (VS)

Cambia y Compara Cualquier Modelo

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Google

Gemma 3

Multimodal abierto

multimodal abierto modelo family con 128K ventana de contexto, nativo visión comprensión, y multi-lingual soporte.

Intelligence Index68 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

131.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Meta

Llama 4 Scout

Rey del contexto de 10M

mundo-record de contexto largo abierto modelo supporting ~3.5 millones tokens para completo codebase y video library ingesta.

Intelligence Index76 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

3.5M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Diferencias Clave de un Vistazo

  • Both models cost the same under this workload — choose on capability, not price.
  • Llama 4 Scout has a larger context window (4M vs 131K tokens).
  • Gemma 3 is faster at 105 tok/s vs 95 tok/s.
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
CaracterísticaGemma 3Llama 4 Scout
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
6876
Provider
GoogleMeta
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
131.1K tokens~197 A4 pages of text3.5M tokens~5,250 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
16K33K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
105 tok/s95 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
N/AN/A
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
61%N/A

¿Quién gana en cada área?

At-a-glance decision framework
Código

Evaluations ongoing

Costo
Tied
Identical monthly runtime cost
Velocidad
Gemma 3
+11% faster generation
Contexto
Llama 4 Scout
3.5M tokens window

Puntuaciones de Benchmarks Verificadas

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Gemma 3Llama 4 Scout
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

61%vsN/A
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

78%vs78%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1335ptsvs1370pts
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

N/Avs92.5%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

105 tok/s vs95 tok/s

Latencia y Tiempo de Respuesta

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Gemma 30.32s
Llama 4 Scout0.65s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Gemma 35.08s
Llama 4 Scout5.91s

Simulador Interactivo de Costos de Tokens

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Gemma 3 Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Llama 4 Scout Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
These models cost the same under this workload — no savings either way.Break-even

Gemma 3 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • nativo visión ingesta en un abierto weight modelo
  • Spacious 128K ventana de contexto
  • sólido rendimiento un través de 100+ idiomas
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • requiere 24GB+ VRAM para el 27B variant
  • carece de extendido cadena de pensamiento modo

Llama 4 Scout · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Colossal 3.5 millones token ventana de contexto
  • Sparse MoE arquitectura keeps activo compute un solo 17B
  • de pesos abiertos available para local implementación
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • requiere alto unified memoria un store el completo 109B weights
  • Secondary razonamiento profundidad en comparación con denso razonamiento modelos

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricGemma 3Llama 4 Scout
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.00$0.00
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
5K10K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

Especificaciones Técnicas

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

CaracterísticaGemma 3Llama 4 Scout
Official API Model ID (SDK)models/gemma-3meta-llama/Llama-4-Scout
API ProtocolGoogle Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDKOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2025-032025-04
Knowledge CutoffDecember 2024January 2025
ArchitectureNative multimodal open transformer with expanded contextExtreme-context sparse MoE multimodal transformer (17B active / 109B total)
Parameters1B / 4B / 12B / 27B17B (109B total MoE)
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)
Computer Use / GUI AgentSupported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxBuilt-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 2 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 4 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 11 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 37 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationGoogle DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework VerifiedOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

Gemma 3 vs Llama 4 Scout: Respuestas Rápidas (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Gemma 3 or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout is more intelligent. It scores 76 compared with 68 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Gemma 3 is faster, generating 105 tokens per second compared with 95 tokens per second.

Which model has lower latency?

Gemma 3 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.32s compared with 0.65s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Llama 4 Scout has a larger context window, supporting 3.5M tokens compared with 131.1K tokens.

Veredicto

Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Gemma 3 if your priority is Self-hosted multimodal applications, local image QA, and long document parsing. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Llama 4 Scout if your workflow prioritizes Whole-repository code analysis, multi-hour video understanding, and legal book ingestion. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.

Preguntas frecuentes

How does Gemma 3 compare to Llama 4 Scout in API token pricing and cost per token?+

Both Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout are open-weights foundation models available at $0.00 direct API cost when self-hosted, or offered at identical baseline rates across major inference providers. Model selection depends on GPU deployment sizing and specialized benchmark performance rather than raw token price.

Which model has a larger context window: Gemma 3 or Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 supports a context window of 131K tokens (~98k words), while Llama 4 Scout supports 3,500K tokens (~2,625k words). Therefore, Llama 4 Scout can process more textual data and document context in a single prompt.

Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: Gemma 3 or Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 scores at the frontier of coding benchmarks, while Llama 4 Scout scores competitively for software generation. For complex autonomous debugging and agentic engineering, Gemma 3 provides robust code generation and tool calling.

What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 is optimized for low-latency direct generation. In contrast, Llama 4 Scout focuses on standard fast inference.

How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 generates approximately 105 tokens per second, while Llama 4 Scout delivers 95 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemma 3 provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.

Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout to optimize costs?+

Yes! Tiered multi-model routing can optimize for latency and accuracy: you can route high-frequency conversational turns and latency-sensitive queries to Gemma 3, and route deep architectural or complex reasoning queries to Gemma 3. This balanced routing strategy maximizes system throughput and answer quality.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Las puntuaciones de benchmarks, precios por token y límites de tasa evolucionan rápidamente. Verifique siempre las especificaciones actuales en la documentación oficial del proveedor.

Fuentes: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs