← All Comparisons
Llama 4 Scout vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
A detailed comparison of Llama 4 Scout (Meta) and Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic) across pricing, performance, and features.
Pricing Comparison
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.18 | $3.00 | +1567% |
| Output / 1M tokens | $0.63 | $15.00 | +2281% |
| Context window | 10M | 200K | — |
| Max output | 32K | 16K | — |
Benchmark Comparison
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 74.2% | 86% |
| HumanEval | 86% | 94% |
| GPQA | — | 70% |
Capabilities
| Capability | Llama 4 Scout | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| code | ✓ | ✓ |
| reasoning | ✗ | ✓ |
| text | ✓ | ✓ |
| tool-use | ✗ | ✓ |
| vision | ✓ | ✓ |
Llama 4 Scout Strengths
- ✓10M token context — largest available
- ✓Open-source
- ✓Ultra cheap via API providers
Llama 4 Scout Weaknesses
- ✗Lower benchmarks than Maverick
- ✗Limited tool-use support
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Strengths
- ✓Opus 4.5 quality at 1/5th the cost
- ✓Best value for production workloads
- ✓1M context in beta
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Weaknesses
- ✗Long context pricing doubles above 200K
- ✗Slightly below Opus 4.6 on hardest tasks
Quick Verdict
Best value: Llama 4 Scout is the more affordable option at $0.18/$0.63 per 1M tokens.
Higher benchmarks: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores higher on average across available benchmarks (83.3% avg).
Larger context: Llama 4 Scout supports 10M tokens.
Choose Llama 4 Scout if cost matters most. Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if you need the best possible quality for complex tasks.