Mistral Nemo 12B vs Gemma 3 12B
Architecture Comparison
SpecMistral Nemo 12BGemma 3 12B
TypeDENSEDENSE
Total Parameters12B12B
Active Parameters12B12B
Layers4048
Hidden Dimension5,1203,072
Attention Heads3232
KV Heads816
Context Length131,072131,072
Precision (default)BF16BF16
Memory Requirements
PrecisionMistral Nemo 12BGemma 3 12B
BF16 Weights24.0 GB24.0 GB
FP8 Weights12.0 GB12.0 GB
INT4 Weights6.0 GB6.0 GB
KV-Cache / Token163840 B393216 B
Activation Estimate1.50 GB1.00 GB
Minimum GPUs Needed (BF16)
H100 SXM1 GPU1 GPU
L40S1 GPU1 GPU
Quality Benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Nemo 12BGemma 3 12B
Overall6271
MMLU68.074.0
HumanEval38.044.0
GSM8K65.078.0
MT-Bench75.080.0
Mistral Nemo 12B
MMLU
68.0
HumanEval
38.0
GSM8K
65.0
MT-Bench
75.0
Gemma 3 12B
MMLU
74.0
HumanEval
44.0
GSM8K
78.0
MT-Bench
80.0
Capabilities
FeatureMistral Nemo 12BGemma 3 12B
Tool Use✓ Yes✓ Yes
Vision✗ No✓ Yes
Code✓ Yes✓ Yes
Math✓ Yes✓ Yes
Reasoning✗ No✗ No
Multilingual✓ Yes✓ Yes
Structured Output✓ Yes✓ Yes
API Pricing Comparison
Cheapest Output (Mistral Nemo 12B)
$0.13/M
Input: $0.13/M
Cheapest Output (Gemma 3 12B)
$0.10/M
Input: $0.05/M
| Provider | Mistral Nemo 12B In $/M | Out $/M | Gemma 3 12B In $/M | Out $/M |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| — | — | $0.05 | $0.10 | |
| deepinfra | $0.13 | $0.13 | — | — |
| together | $0.18 | $0.18 | $0.15 | $0.15 |
Recommendation Summary
- ‣Gemma 3 12B scores higher on overall quality (71 vs 62).
- ‣Gemma 3 12B is cheaper per output token ($0.10/M vs $0.13/M).
- ‣Gemma 3 12B is stronger at code generation (HumanEval: 44.0 vs 38.0).
- ‣Gemma 3 12B is better at math reasoning (GSM8K: 78.0 vs 65.0).
Compare Other Models
Mistral Nemo 12B vs DeepSeek R1→Mistral Nemo 12B vs DeepSeek V3→Mistral Nemo 12B vs Gemma 3 27B→Mistral Nemo 12B vs Llama 3.1 405B→Mistral Nemo 12B vs Llama 3.1 70B→Mistral Nemo 12B vs Llama 3.1 8B→Gemma 3 12B vs DeepSeek R1→Gemma 3 12B vs DeepSeek V3→Gemma 3 12B vs Gemma 3 27B→Gemma 3 12B vs Llama 3.1 405B→