Objective comparison based on public benchmarks updated weekly: Intelligence Index, GPQA Diamond, Chatbot Arena ELO, pricing and speed.
Anthropic
ELO Arena
1471
Intelligence Index
35.9
Coding Index
46.4
4 criteria won
View full profile →| Critério | Llama 4 Scout | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Chatbot Arena ELO | — | 1471 ✓ |
| Intelligence Index (AA) | 10.0 | 35.9 ✓ |
| Coding Index (AA) | 8.2 | 46.4 ✓ |
| GPQA Diamond | 59.0% | 80.0% ✓ |
| Input price ($/1M tok) | $0.17 ✓ | $3.00 |
| Output price ($/1M tok) | $0.63 ✓ | $15.00 |
| Context window | 10.0M tokens ✓ | 1.0M tokens |
| Speed (tokens/s) | 90 tok/s ✓ | 46 tok/s |
✓ = winner in this criterion • Source: Artificial Analysis, LMArena, official APIs • Updated weekly
Choosing between Llama 4 Scout and Claude Sonnet 4.6 depends on your use case, budget and technical requirements. Below, a practical guide based on benchmark data and each model's specifications.
Meta · Multimodal · Open Source
Anthropic · Multimodal
Llama 4 Scout and Claude Sonnet 4.6 are evenly matched in this comparison. Choose based on the criterion most important for your project.
Data is aggregated from Artificial Analysis (Intelligence Index, Coding Index) and Chatbot Arena/LMArena (ELO). Pricing and specs come from official APIs. Updated weekly.
The Intelligence Index is an aggregate score from Artificial Analysis that combines multiple academic benchmarks (MMLU, GPQA, LiveBench, etc.) into a single rating. The higher the score, the more capable the model is at reasoning tasks.
Yes. Llama 4 Scout costs $0.175/1M input tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3/1M tokens — 1614% more expensive. For high-volume projects, Llama 4 Scout represents significant savings. Total cost also depends on output pricing and your application's usage pattern.
Llama 4 Scout has the larger context window: 10.0M tokens vs 1.0M tokens. For long document analysis, extensive transcripts or full codebases, the larger context window is a decisive criterion.