Auto-generated comparison

ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B vs Google: Gemma 3 27B

Google: Gemma 3 27B wins on 3 of 6 axes — pricing and capability skew in its favour for most workloads.

Side-by-side comparison

CapabilityByteDance: UI-TARS 7BGoogle: Gemma 3 27BWinner
Context window
Maximum number of input tokens the model can attend to in a single request.
128K131K🏆 Google: Gemma 3 27B
Input price (per 1M)
Cost per million input tokens billed by the provider.
$0.10$0.08🏆 Google: Gemma 3 27B
Output price (per 1M)
Cost per million output tokens billed by the provider.
$0.20$0.45🏆 ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B
Tool / function calling
First-class support for emitting structured tool calls.
Yes🏆 Google: Gemma 3 27B
Vision input
Accepts image inputs alongside text.
YesYesTie
Reasoning mode
Internal chain-of-thought / extended-thinking support.
Tie

Frequently asked questions

Is ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B better than Google: Gemma 3 27B?

Google: Gemma 3 27B wins on 3 of 6 axes — pricing and capability skew in its favour for most workloads.

What's the price difference between ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B and Google: Gemma 3 27B?

Input: $0.10 vs $0.08 per 1M tokens. Output: $0.20 vs $0.45 per 1M tokens.

What context windows do ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B and Google: Gemma 3 27B support?

ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B supports up to 128K tokens. Google: Gemma 3 27B supports up to 131K tokens.

Do both ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B and Google: Gemma 3 27B support tool calling?

ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B: not advertised. Google: Gemma 3 27B: yes.

Compare ByteDance: UI-TARS 7B with other models

Compare Google: Gemma 3 27B with other models