Back to Value Frontier

Tencent: Hy3 preview vs Google: Gemma 3n 4B

Head-to-head API cost, context, and performance comparison. Synced at 5:59:58 AM.

Executive Summary

When evaluating Tencent: Hy3 preview against Google: Gemma 3n 4B, the pricing structure is a key differentiator. Google: Gemma 3n 4B is approximately 34% more cost-effective per 1 million tokens overall.

However, when looking at raw reasoning capabilities, Tencent: Hy3 preview leads with a statistical ELO score of 1053. For tasks involving complex logic, coding, or instruction-following, developers might prefer Tencent: Hy3 preview, provided their budget allows for the API burn rate.

Arbitrage Alert

You are losing 34%
per million tokens by hardcoding Tencent: Hy3 preview.

Stop guessing exactly which model to route to. Deploy the 0ms Intelligence Engine to automatically arbitrage this 34% gap in your production environment instantly.

34% Instant Profit Margin Recovery
Node.js Enterprise SDK included

Raw Technical comparison

Metric
Tencent: Hy3 preview
Google: Gemma 3n 4B
Performance (ELO)
1053
1052
Input Cost / 1M
$0.06
$0.06
Output Cost / 1M
$0.21
$0.12
Context Window
262,144 tokens
32,768 tokens

Verdict

If you are looking for pure performance and capability, Tencent: Hy3 preview is statistically superior. However, if API burn rate is the primary concern, Google: Gemma 3n 4B wins out aggressively in pricing.

People Also Ask

Is Tencent: Hy3 preview cheaper than Google: Gemma 3n 4B?

No. Google: Gemma 3n 4B is the more cost-effective model, operating at a lower price point per 1 million tokens.

Which model has the larger context window?

The Tencent: Hy3 preview model has the advantage in memory, offering a massive 262,144 token limit for document ingestion.

Related Comparisons

Compare Tencent: Hy3 preview vs Cohere: North Mini Code (free)Compare Tencent: Hy3 preview vs OpenRouter: FusionCompare Tencent: Hy3 preview vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety (free)Compare Tencent: Hy3 preview vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Ultra (free)