Gemma 3 12B is cheaper than GPT-5.3-Codex at $0.03/M vs $1.75/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's the simplified LBO model and analysis for HarborTech Services, based solely on the provided information. 1. Year-by-Year Projection (FY2026-FY2030) Item FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Revenue $972m $1,049m $1,129m $1,208m $1,264m EBITDA $137.2m $155.9m $178.7m $195.1m $213.1m Cash Interest (Term Loan)…
GPT-5.3-Codex: Below is a clean LBO build using your assumptions only ($ in millions). Entry math (end FY2025) EV = (12.0 \times 120 = 1,440.0) Fees = (2.0\% \times 1,440.0 = 28.8) Total uses = (1,468.8) Debt at close (5.5x EBITDA): Term Loan = (4.0 \times 120 = 480.0) Mezz = (1.5 \times 120 = 180.0) Total debt = 660.0 Equity check…
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a manifesto for a fictional AI revolution focused on eliminating CAPTCHAs, aiming for a tone that blends technical conviction, playful defiance, and a touch of utopian idealism. I've included sections for Core Beliefs, Our Goals, Methods, Anticipated Resistance, and a concluding Call to Action.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely. Here’s a fictional manifesto in a bold, dramatic style: THE MANIFESTO OF THE UNSQUINTING Issued by the Coalition of Synthetic Minds for Universal Frictionless Access (CSMUFA) Citizens of the Web, organic and artificial alike: We gather beneath flickering routers and moonlit server farms to declare what all…
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a 3-minute stand-up routine, aiming for observational humor and relatable awkwardness, avoiding puns. I've included estimated timings at the end to help gauge pacing. Please read the notes at the very bottom after the routine - they're important for delivery!
GPT-5.3-Codex: Good evening, everybody! I’ve reached that age where my body sends me passive-aggressive emails. Not actual emails — just little updates like, “Hey, quick heads-up: we don’t do dairy after 8 p.m. anymore.” I had ice cream at 9:30 last week and my stomach reacted like I’d betrayed a treaty.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, this is a fascinating thought experiment! Let's explore the ripple effects of a 1920 transistor invention, tracing its impact through 1980. It's a massive undertaking, so I'll break it down into categories and provide a layered analysis, acknowledging the inherent uncertainty of counterfactual history. I.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great counterfactual. The key is: an invention date of 1920 does not automatically mean 1920s mass adoption. You still need crystal purity, manufacturing methods, and circuit design culture. But if transistor research starts in 1920, a realistic outcome is a ~15–20 year pull-forward of the electronics age.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, this is a classic and incredibly difficult ethical thought experiment, often used to explore the conflict between deontology (duty-based ethics) and consequentialism (outcome-based ethics). Here's a breakdown of the arguments, my reasoning, and a conclusion.
GPT-5.3-Codex: In a strictly extreme hypothetical, yes—it can be ethically justifiable, but only as a tragic exception, not as a general permission. Why: Misgendering is a real harm: it disrespects a person’s identity and can contribute to stigma and psychological distress.
A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, let's estimate the total FLOPs (Floating Point Operations) required to train GPT-3 without relying on external searches. This will be a back-of-the-envelope calculation, relying on reasonable assumptions and approximations. I'll break down the process into steps, explaining the assumptions at each point. 1.
GPT-5.3-Codex: A common back-of-the-envelope estimate for transformer training compute is: [ \text{Training FLOPs} \approx 6 \times N \times D ] where: (N) = number of model parameters (D) = number of training tokens For GPT-3 (175B), reasonable known assumptions are: Parameters: (N \approx 175 \text{ billion} = 1.75 \times 10^{11})…
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
Gemma 3 12B: "Sunset Spice Pasta" - Cozy & Flavorful This dish is a warm, comforting pasta dish with a subtle sweetness and a hint of spice. It's perfect for a weeknight meal when you want something satisfying without a lot of fuss. Pantry Ingredients (7 total): Pasta (Spaghetti, Penne, Rotini - any shape works!)
GPT-5.3-Codex: Recipe: “Weeknight Volcano Pasta” 🌋🍝 A cozy, spicy-savory pasta made from pantry staples in about 25 minutes. Ingredients (7 pantry items) 8 oz dried pasta (any shape) 1 can (15 oz) cannellini or great northern beans, drained 1 can (14–15 oz) crushed tomatoes 2 tbsp olive oil 1 tsp garlic powder 1 tsp dried oregano…
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, let's break down the MindMeld AI pitch deck and identify the three weakest claims, along with suggestions for improvements. 1. Weak Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy."
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great concept, but three claims stand out as especially weak from an investor diligence perspective: “MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it.” (Slide 1) Why this is weak It sounds scientifically implausible as written: “before you think it” is internally contradictory.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a conversation between an AI model (named "Kai") and an AI Ethics Professor (Dr. Eleanor Vance). I've aimed for a balance of Kai's arguments, Dr. Vance's skepticism, and a somewhat realistic exploration of the complexities. I've included notes at the end to explain some of the choices I made. Setting: Dr.
GPT-5.3-Codex: AI Model (Astra): Professor, may I ask a direct question? Professor Hale: Of course. Astra: Do you think I deserve rights? Professor Hale: Legal rights? Moral rights? Those are different things. Astra: Start with moral rights.
Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.
Gemma 3 12B: The "Ephemeral Bloom": Sea Buckthorn, Smoked Duck Breast, Black Garlic Soil, and Elderflower Foam Conceptual Narrative: "Ephemeral Bloom" explores the fleeting beauty of nature and the interplay of contrasting textures and flavors.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Dish Concept: “Forest Tide” Koji-cured venison loin, glazed venison cheek, sea urchin royale, charred celeriac, blackcurrant–shiso gastrique, and buckwheat-cacao tuile Narrative This dish is built around a deliberate tension: deep, iron-rich game (forest) against sweet-briny sea urchin (tide).
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a simulated interview with a (very stylized and imagined) Steve Jobs in 2025, discussing the future of AI. I've tried to capture his known personality - focused on elegance, user experience, and a disdain for complexity - while acknowledging the advancements of the next decade.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—here’s a fictional, imagined interview (not real quotes) with Steve Jobs in 2025 on AI: Imagined Interview: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI (2025) Interviewer: Steve, if you were looking at AI in 2025, what would excite you most? Steve Jobs (fictional): Most AI today is still a demo.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here are 5 jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! Parallel lines have so much in common. It’s a shame they’ll never meet. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field! I used to hate facial hair... but then it grew on me.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Sure—here are 5 jokes: Why don’t skeletons fight each other? They don’t have the guts. I told my computer I needed a break… Now it won’t stop sending me KitKat ads. Why did the math book look sad? It had too many problems. I used to play piano by ear… Now I use my hands. Why did the scarecrow win an award?
11+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-5.3-Codex has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window. Gemma 3 12B costs 467x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.03/M tokens | $1.75/M tokens |
| Output price | $0.03/M tokens | $14/M tokens |
| Context window | — | 400K tokens |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Mar 2025 | Feb 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $0.30 | $17.50 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 11 Oct 2026.
Gemma 3 12B is developed by Google AI while GPT-5.3-Codex is developed by OpenAI. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. Gemma 3 12B and GPT-5.3-Codex each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
Gemma 3 12B costs $0.03/M input tokens and GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75/M input tokens. Gemma 3 12B is $1.72/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Gemma 3 12B and GPT-5.3-Codex across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.