Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Claude Opus 5 delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,624 vs 1,412), while Claude Opus 5 leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (79.2%), while Llama 4 Scout is more budget-friendly at $0.3/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.
10 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost
Anthropic current default flagship. Official API $5/$25 per 1M tokens and a 1M context window (Anthropic, Jul 24 2026).
Meta open-weight Llama 4 long-context sibling of Maverick. Common public API lists sit near $0.08–$0.30 / $0.30–$0.70 per 1M; we store a conservative hosted list until OpenRouter overwrites.
Currently comparing Claude Opus 5 vs Llama 4 Scout. Alternative family tiers available.
Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost
Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.
Δ 212 Arena Elo pts
155 tok/s
$0.3 / 1M output
Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.
Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.
Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.
Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy
Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness
Cost per million tokens and max context window length
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Llama 4 Scout | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +212 | ||
| Coding Elo | +220 | ||
| LiveBench | +15.2% | ||
| SWE-bench | +26.8% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +15.9% | ||
| Time to first token | +180 ms | ||
| Output speed | 72 tok/s | 155 tok/s | +83 tok/s |
| Input price | $0.08/1M | +$4.92/1M | |
| Output price | +$24.7/1M | ||
| Context window | +9M |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
Llama 4 Scout is estimated to save $542.70/month ($6,512/year).
Higher SWE-bench (79.2%).
Lower output list price ($0.3/1M).
Lower TTFT (130 ms).
Larger window (10M).
Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Claude Opus 5).
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Claude Opus 5 | Higher SWE-bench (79.2%). |
| High-volume chat | Llama 4 Scout | Lower output list price ($0.3/1M). |
| Voice / low-latency UI | Llama 4 Scout | Lower TTFT (130 ms). |
| Long-document RAG | Llama 4 Scout | Larger window (10M). |
| Screenshots / vision | Claude Opus 5 | Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Claude Opus 5). |
$1/$5 hosted Claude vs a cheap long-context open sibling. The alternative-to-Sonnet pair that is honest.
Usually Sonnet 5 vs Opus 5. Coding delta versus output $/1M. The workhorse question.
Top Anthropic vs top Google. Usually Opus 5 vs 3.6 Pro. Two different invoices.
Not a frozen 2025 article. Today that is usually Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol. Dated cells, not a brand fight.
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/claude-opus-5-vs-llama-4-scout/opengraph-image
Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry
compare · Aug 16, 2026
Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Scout: cheap Claude versus cheap open Llama
compare · Aug 10, 2026
Sonnet vs Opus in 2026: same family, different invoice
compare · Jul 24, 2026
Claude vs Gemini: coding, Elo, and output price — not a brand mashup
compare · Jul 24, 2026
Claude vs GPT benchmark: this hub always remaps to the current Elo leaders