Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Llama 4 Scout

Claude 3.5 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Llama 4 Scout is 44.4x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

9 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperforms in 7 benchmarks (ChartQA, DocVQA, GPQA, MATH, MGSM, MMLU, MMLU-Pro), while Llama 4 Scout is better at 2 benchmarks (MathVista, MMMU).

Claude 3.5 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Apr 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Llama 4 Scout costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 37.5x more expensive than Llama 4 Scout ($0.08/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 50.0x more expensive than Llama 4 Scout ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is more expensive than Llama 4 Scout.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Apr 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
Input tokens$0.08
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Llama 4 Scout accepts 10,000,000 input tokens compared to Claude 3.5 Sonnet's 200,000 tokens. Llama 4 Scout can generate longer responses up to 10,000,000 tokens, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is limited to 200,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
Input10,000,000 tokens
Output10,000,000 tokens
Wed Apr 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 4 Scout support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 4 Scout

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 4 Scout uses Llama 4 Community License Agreement.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 4 Scout

Llama 4 Community License Agreement

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Sonnet was released on 2024-10-22, while Llama 4 Scout was released on 2025-04-05.

Llama 4 Scout is 6 months newer than Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

Llama 4 Scout

Apr 5, 2025

1.0 years ago

5mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Llama 4 Scout is available from DeepInfra, Lambda, Novita, Groq, Fireworks, Together.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

Llama 4 Scout

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.08/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M
lambda logo
Lambda
Input Price:Input: $0.08/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
groq logo
Groq
Input Price:Input: $0.11/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.34/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.59/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Higher ChartQA score (90.8% vs 88.8%)
Higher DocVQA score (95.2% vs 94.4%)
Higher GPQA score (67.2% vs 57.2%)
Higher MATH score (78.3% vs 50.3%)
Higher MGSM score (91.6% vs 90.6%)
Higher MMLU score (90.4% vs 79.6%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (77.6% vs 74.3%)
Meta
Larger context window (10,000,000 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher MathVista score (70.7% vs 67.7%)
Higher MMMU score (69.4% vs 68.3%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Meta
Llama 4 Scout

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Llama 4 Scout

Claude 3.5 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and Llama 4 Scout is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores GSM8k: 96.4%, DocVQA: 95.2%, AI2D: 94.7%, HumanEval: 93.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 93.1%. Llama 4 Scout scores DocVQA: 94.4%, MGSM: 90.6%, ChartQA: 88.8%, MMLU: 79.6%, MMLU-Pro: 74.3%.
Llama 4 Scout is 37.5x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.5 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. Llama 4 Scout costs $0.08/M input and $0.30/M output via deepinfra.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and Llama 4 Scout supports 10.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (200K vs 10.0M), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.08/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 4 Community License Agreement). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and Llama 4 Scout is developed by Meta.