The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

LFM3-1.7B vs Llama 4 Scout

LFM3-1.7B leads the LLM Stats Score 25.0 to 7.3.

Liquid AI · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

LFM3-1.7B leads the overall LLM Stats Score 25.0 to 7.3, ranking #192 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, LFM3-1.7B wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose LFM3-1.7B

  • overall performance matters — it scores 25.0 and ranks #192 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Llama 4 Scout

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.08/M input and $0.30/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

LFM3-1.7B
Liquid AI
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
25.0
#192
7.3
#324
Reasoning
20.8
#216
6.0
#327
Coding
7.4
#218
0.3
#276
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
— / M
$0.08 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.30 / M
Context window
—
10,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
LFM3-1.7B
Llama 4 Scout
Math
7.6#285
12.7#253
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

20 reported for LFM3-1.7B · 12 for Llama 4 Scout

1 shared

LFM3-1.7B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Llama 4 Scout is better at 0 benchmarks.

LFM3-1.7B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Nov 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

107.3B diff

Llama 4 Scout has 107.3B more parameters than LFM3-1.7B, making it 6200.6% larger.

Liquid AI
LFM3-1.7B
1.7Bparameters
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
109.0Bparameters
1.7B
LFM3-1.7B
109.0B
Llama 4 Scout

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 4 Scout specifies input context (10,000,000 tokens). Only Llama 4 Scout specifies output context (10,000,000 tokens).

Liquid AI
LFM3-1.7B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
Input10,000,000 tokens
Output10,000,000 tokens
Tue Nov 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Llama 4 Scout supports multimodal inputs, whereas LFM3-1.7B does not.

Llama 4 Scout can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

LFM3-1.7B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 4 Scout

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

LFM3-1.7B is licensed under LFM Open License v1.0, 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.

LFM3-1.7B

LFM Open License v1.0

Open weights

Llama 4 Scout

Llama 4 Community License Agreement

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

LFM3-1.7B was released on 2026-10-27, while Llama 4 Scout was released on 2025-04-05.

LFM3-1.7B is 19 months newer than Llama 4 Scout.

LFM3-1.7B

Oct 27, 2026

5 days ago

1.6yr newer
Llama 4 Scout

Apr 5, 2025

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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against LFM3-1.7B and Llama 4 Scout side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

LFM3-1.7B
✓ Preferred
Llama 4 Scout
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about LFM3-1.7B vs Llama 4 Scout.

Which is better, LFM3-1.7B or Llama 4 Scout?

LFM3-1.7B leads the LLM Stats Score 25.0 to 7.3. LFM3-1.7B is made by Liquid AI and Llama 4 Scout is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does LFM3-1.7B compare to Llama 4 Scout in benchmarks?

LFM3-1.7B scores IFEval: 96.7%, Multi-IF: 89.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 73.5%, IFBench: 73.0%, BFCL-V4: 71.4%. Llama 4 Scout scores DocVQA: 94.4%, MGSM: 90.6%, ChartQA: 88.8%, MMLU: 79.6%, MMLU-Pro: 74.3%.

What are the context window sizes for LFM3-1.7B and Llama 4 Scout?

LFM3-1.7B supports an unknown number of 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.

What are the main differences between LFM3-1.7B and Llama 4 Scout?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (25.0 vs 7.3), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (LFM Open License v1.0 vs Llama 4 Community License Agreement). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes LFM3-1.7B and Llama 4 Scout?

LFM3-1.7B is developed by Liquid AI and Llama 4 Scout is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons