OpenAI compatible API · Attested · Public status

Google: Gemma 3 27B vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra

Google: Gemma 3 27B vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra: compare current API pricing, context, provider routes, privacy, p50 latency, and OpenAI-compatible access.

Verify gateway

Onebase URL to migrate

100sof models and routes

0prompt or output logs. Always.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

Google: Gemma 3 27B has the lower cheapest prompt+completion route on TrustedRouter. NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra has more provider fallback routes, while NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra has the larger context window. Current TrustedRouter probes show NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra with the lower p50 TTFT.

$0.2532/1MGoogle: Gemma 3 27B cheapest route

$2.8485/1MNVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra cheapest route

1102 msGoogle: Gemma 3 27B fastest measured p50 TTFT via parasail

921 msNVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra fastest measured p50 TTFT via wandb

Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

Google: Gemma 3 27BNVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra

Model idgoogle/gemma-3-27b-itnvidia/nemotron-3-ultra-550b-a55b

Publisher Google AI Studio DeepInfra

AI IQ — —

Context131,072 tokens256,000 tokens

Credits provider routes45

Cheapest route$0.2532/1M$2.8485/1M

Cached input$0.0422/1M$0.1055/1M to $0.15825/1M

Privacy posturehas ZDR routehas ZDR route

Fastest measured p50 TTFT1102 ms via parasail921 ms via wandb

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%0.00% to 100.00%

Modes chat chat

Google: Gemma 3 27B routes

Overview4 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra routes

Overview5 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra vs Z.ai: GLM 5.236 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 27B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.235 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra28 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra27 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 27B vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K327 combined provider routes
NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra vs Z.ai: GLM 5.327 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs Google: Gemma 3 27B26 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 27B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.326 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="google/gemma-3-27b-it",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, Google: Gemma 3 27B or NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Is Google: Gemma 3 27B or NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $0.2532/1M for Google: Gemma 3 27B and $2.8485/1M for NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Google: Gemma 3 27B or NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 1102 ms for Google: Gemma 3 27B and 921 ms for NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Google: Gemma 3 27B and NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between google/gemma-3-27b-it and nvidia/nemotron-3-ultra-550b-a55b. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.