Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Llama 4 Maverick delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,468 vs 1,412), while Llama 4 Maverick leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (57.1%), 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
Meta natively multimodal open-weight flagship.
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 Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 4 Scout. Alternative family tiers available.
Δ 56 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 | Llama 4 Maverick | Llama 4 Scout | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +56 | ||
| Coding Elo | +54 | ||
| LiveBench | +3.2% | ||
| SWE-bench | +4.7% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +3.4% | ||
| Time to first token | +40 ms | ||
| Output speed | 130 tok/s | 155 tok/s | +25 tok/s |
| Input price | $0.2/1M | $0.08/1M | +$0.12/1M |
| Output price | $0.6/1M | +$0.3/1M | |
| Context window | +9M |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
Llama 4 Scout is estimated to save $8.70/month ($104/year).
Higher SWE-bench (57.1%).
Lower output list price ($0.3/1M).
Lower TTFT (130 ms).
Larger window (10M).
Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Llama 4 Maverick).
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Llama 4 Maverick | Higher SWE-bench (57.1%). |
| 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 | Llama 4 Maverick | Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Llama 4 Maverick). |
$1/$5 hosted Claude vs a cheap long-context open sibling. The alternative-to-Sonnet pair that is honest.
Hub remaps to top Meta vs top Anthropic Elo. Usually Maverick vs Opus 5.
Huge window, cheap hosted lists. The Haiku alternative that is actually open-weight.
Apr 2026. The Llama vs Claude hub uses the top Meta Elo row — usually Maverick.
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/llama-4-maverick-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 · Apr 9, 2026
Llama vs Claude: open-weight Meta versus the Anthropic crown
launch · Apr 8, 2026
Llama 4 Scout: long-context open sibling of Maverick
launch · Apr 8, 2026
Llama 4 Maverick: Meta’s natively multimodal open-weight flagship