ModelRefs / Llama 4 Scout vs Gemma 3 27B — Benchmarks, Pricing & Coding…
Llama 4 Scout vs Gemma 3 27B — Benchmarks, Pricing & Coding…
Llama 4 Scout vs Gemma 3 27B: side-by-side benchmarks, pricing, context windows, coding ability and deployment. Pick the right model for your stack.
Overview
Llama 4 Scout: Llama 4 Scout is Meta's efficiency-focused open-weights model with an exceptionally large 10M-token context window and vision support. It is optimized for long-document retrieval and low-cost inference at scale.
Context window: Gemma 3 27B accepts up to 128,000 tokens, Llama 4 Scout up to 10,000,000. Confirm the limit for your specific deployment channel before relying on it.
Gemma 3 27B vs Llama 4 Scout at a glance
| Attribute | Gemma 3 27B | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Released | 2025-02-01 | 2025-04-01 |
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 10,000,000 tokens |
| Input price | $0.1/M tokens | $0.11/M tokens |
| Output price | $0.3/M tokens | $0.34/M tokens |
| Licence | Gemma | Llama 4 Community |
| Self-hostable | Yes, open weights | Yes, open weights |
| Modalities | text, vision | text, vision |
Where they differ most
- Reasoning: Gemma 3 27B 82%, Llama 4 Scout 67%. Gemma 3 27B leads on this dimension.
- Cost Efficiency: Gemma 3 27B 95%, Llama 4 Scout 94%. Gemma 3 27B leads on this dimension.
Capability scores are ModelRefs' own derived signals, not vendor claims or benchmark results. Validate against your own workload before relying on them.
Continue your research
Use these connected ModelRefs sections to compare alternatives, inspect implementation paths, and review the evidence and governance boundaries relevant to Llama 4 Scout vs Gemma 3 27B — Benchmarks, Pricing & Coding….
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Llama 4 Scout or Gemma 3 27B?
Llama 4 Scout and Gemma 3 27B target different workloads — see the benchmark and pricing tables for a side-by-side answer.
Is Llama 4 Scout cheaper than Gemma 3 27B?
Compare $0.00011 vs $0.00010 on this page.