gemma3-27b vs llama3.1-70b on RTX 3080
Compare gemma3-27b and llama3.1-70b running locally on RTX 3080 (10GB VRAM) — tokens/sec, VRAM fit, and quality scores for local inference.
Compare a different combination
| Quant | Q4_K_M |
| VRAM required | 16.5GB |
| Fits on RTX 3080 | ✗ No |
| Quality score | 68 / 100 |
| Eval sources | MMLU-Pro · IFEval · HumanEval · MBPP+ · LiveCodeBench |
| Data | estimate |
Add a source link or correction so this page can rank with real hardware-specific data instead of estimates.
Contribute GPU comparison dataGPU comparison FAQ
Which is faster on RTX 3080: gemma3-27b or llama3.1-70b?
This RTX 3080 comparison shows VRAM fit and quality data for gemma3-27b vs llama3.1-70b, but one or both decode-speed benchmarks are still missing.
Do both models fit on RTX 3080?
gemma3-27b: ✗ No. llama3.1-70b: ✗ No. The fit labels use Q4_K_M VRAM estimates and the benchmark data available for this GPU.
How much VRAM do these models need?
gemma3-27b needs about 16.5GB in Q4_K_M; llama3.1-70b needs about 42GB in Q4_K_M.
Why can speed differ by GPU?
Local LLM speed depends on GPU memory bandwidth, backend, quantization, context length, and whether the model fits entirely in VRAM or unified memory.
How can I correct this comparison?
Use the GitHub correction link on this page with your GPU, model, quantization, context length, and measured decode tokens per second.