Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 82.8x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sat May 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 42.9x more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.35/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4 ($75.00/1M tokens) is 187.5x more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4 is more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat May 09 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$75.00
Best providerAnthropic
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input tokens$0.35
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 4 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Llama 3.2 90B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Claude Opus 4 is limited to 32,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Input200,000 tokens
Output32,000 tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Sat May 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude Opus 4 and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Opus 4

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct uses Llama 3.2.

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

Claude Opus 4

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4 was released on 2025-05-22, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Claude Opus 4 is 8 months newer than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Claude Opus 4

May 22, 2025

11 months ago

7mo newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

1.6 years ago

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 Opus 4 is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Bedrock, Fireworks, Together, Hyperbolic.

Claude Opus 4

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $75.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $75.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $75.00/1M

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.35/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.72/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.72/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $1.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher GPQA score (79.6% vs 46.7%)
Meta
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
AnthropicClaude Opus 4
MetaLlama 3.2 90B Instruct
Compare in Playground

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4 vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4 or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4 is made by Anthropic and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude Opus 4 compare to Llama 3.2 90B Instruct in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4 scores MMMLU: 88.8%, TAU-bench Retail: 81.4%, GPQA: 79.6%, MMMU (validation): 76.5%, AIME 2025: 75.5%. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct scores AI2D: 92.3%, DocVQA: 90.1%, MGSM: 86.9%, MMLU: 86.0%, ChartQA: 85.5%.

Is Claude Opus 4 cheaper than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 42.9x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4 costs $15.00/M input and $75.00/M output via anthropic. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs $0.35/M input and $0.40/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4 and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4 supports 200K tokens and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Opus 4 and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 128K), input pricing ($15.00 vs $0.35/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.2). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4 and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?

Claude Opus 4 is developed by Anthropic and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is developed by Meta.