Free to start

Google: Gemma 3 27B vs MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Try both on us. Starter credit covers your first requests, then one key routes Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax M3.1 Flash. Switch by changing the model name.

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 published input-plus-output rate. MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash has more Credits provider routes and the larger context window. There is not enough recent probe data to compare speed.

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

$0.79125/1MMiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash cheapest route

not enough dataGoogle: Gemma 3 27B fastest measured p50 TTFT

not enough dataMiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash fastest measured p50 TTFT

The price comparison adds each route's rate for one million input tokens and one million output tokens; your cost depends on your input/output mix. 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 27BMiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Model idgoogle/gemma-3-27b-itminimax/minimax-m3.1-flash

Publisher Google AI Studio MiniMax

AI IQ — IQ 120#49

Context131,072 tokens1,048,576 tokens

Credits provider routes610

Cheapest route$0.2532/1M$0.79125/1M

Cached input$0.0422/1M$0.015825/1M to $0.019782/1M

Privacy posturehas ZDR routehas ZDR route

Fastest measured p50 TTFTnot enough datanot enough data

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime rangenot enough datanot enough data

Modes chat chat

Google: Gemma 3 27B routes

Overview6 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash routes

Overview10 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Z.ai: GLM 5.243 combined provider routes
MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Z.ai: GLM 5.343 combined provider routes
MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash42 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 27B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.239 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 27B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.339 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 27B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash38 combined provider routes
MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K338 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash36 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-aws.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 MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

Is Google: Gemma 3 27B or MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $0.2532/1M for Google: Gemma 3 27B and $0.79125/1M for MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Google: Gemma 3 27B or MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is not enough data for Google: Gemma 3 27B and not enough data for MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Google: Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax: MiniMax M3.1 Flash 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 minimax/minimax-m3.1-flash. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.