Make AI phone calls with one API call

Start for free

Model Comparison

GPT-4o vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

GPT-4o significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 12.1x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

8 benchmarks

GPT-4o outperforms in 7 benchmarks (AI2D, ChartQA, DocVQA, GPQA, MathVista, MMMU, MMMU-Pro), while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is better at 1 benchmark (MMLU).

GPT-4o significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Apr 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

CallingBox

Done comparing? Ship the phone agent.

One API for outbound and inbound calls.

Start for freeRead the docs
$0.05 /min all-in7 lines of code

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs less

For input processing, GPT-4o ($2.50/1M tokens) is 7.1x more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.35/1M tokens).

For output processing, GPT-4o ($10.00/1M tokens) is 25.0x more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GPT-4o 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
Fri Apr 24 2026 • llm-stats.com
OpenAI
GPT-4o
Input tokens$2.50
Output tokens$10.00
Best providerAzure
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

Both models have the same input context window of 128,000 tokens. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while GPT-4o is limited to 16,384 tokens.

OpenAI
GPT-4o
Input128,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Fri Apr 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both GPT-4o and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct support multimodal inputs.

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

GPT-4o

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GPT-4o 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.

GPT-4o

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GPT-4o was released on 2024-08-06, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 2 months newer than GPT-4o.

GPT-4o

Aug 6, 2024

1.7 years ago

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

1.6 years ago

1mo 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

GPT-4o is available from Azure, OpenAI. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Bedrock, Fireworks, Together, Hyperbolic.

GPT-4o

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $2.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $10.00/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $2.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $10.00/1M

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

OpenAI
Higher AI2D score (94.2% vs 92.3%)
Higher ChartQA score (85.7% vs 85.5%)
Higher DocVQA score (92.8% vs 90.1%)
Higher GPQA score (70.1% vs 46.7%)
Higher MathVista score (61.4% vs 57.3%)
Higher MMMU score (72.2% vs 60.3%)
Higher MMMU-Pro score (59.9% vs 45.2%)
Meta
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher MMLU score (86.0% vs 85.7%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
OpenAI
GPT-4o
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about GPT-4o vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

GPT-4o significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GPT-4o is made by OpenAI 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.
GPT-4o scores AI2D: 94.2%, DocVQA: 92.8%, ChartQA: 85.7%, MMLU: 85.7%, CharXiv-D: 85.3%. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct scores AI2D: 92.3%, DocVQA: 90.1%, MGSM: 86.9%, MMLU: 86.0%, ChartQA: 85.5%.
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 7.1x cheaper for input tokens. GPT-4o costs $2.50/M input and $10.00/M output via azure. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs $0.35/M input and $0.40/M output via deepinfra.
GPT-4o supports 128K 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.
Key differences include input pricing ($2.50 vs $0.35/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.2). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
GPT-4o is developed by OpenAI and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is developed by Meta.