Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Llama 4 Scout

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

47.74/100
Margin
7.9pts
← winning
39.87/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 3.5 Sonnet #132 (Estimated); Llama 4 Scout #174 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 4 Scout share 1 comparable benchmark result. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Claude 3.5 Sonnet; 17 to Llama 4 Scout.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
1
Claude 3.5 Sonnet only
3
Llama 4 Scout only
17
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 4 Scout is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is priced at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Llama 4 Scout. Llama 4 Scout has the larger context window at 10M, compared with 200K for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 4 Scout
CategoryClaude 3.5 SonnetΔLlama 4 Scout
CodingClaude 3.5 Sonnet49.0MarginNo overlapLlama 4 ScoutNot measured
KnowledgeClaude 3.5 Sonnet59.4MarginNo overlapLlama 4 ScoutNot measured
MathClaude 3.5 Sonnet1.6MarginNo overlapLlama 4 ScoutNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude 3.5 SonnetB · Llama 4 Scout

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 2.069%B 0.000%
    Winner: Claude 3.5 SonnetΔ 2.1
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude 3.5 Sonnet scored 2.069%; Llama 4 Scout scored 0.000%. Claude 3.5 Sonnet wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 3.5 Sonnet$3 input / $15 outputLlama 4 Scout$0 input / $0 outputLlama 4 Scout has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 3.5 SonnetNot availableLlama 4 Scout128 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 3.5 SonnetNot availableLlama 4 Scout0.70 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 3.5 Sonnet200KLlama 4 Scout10MLlama 4 Scout lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutResult
AA Agentic IndexSource —1.1%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource —15.5%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —0.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —90Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 49%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —8.2%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource —17.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutResult
AA-LCRSource —25.8%Not comparable
CritPtSource —0.0%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutResult
GPQASource 59.4%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource —10.0%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource —58.7%Not comparable
AA-HLESource —4.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource —-52.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource —14.6%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource —78.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 2.069%0.000%Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 0.000%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource —52.9%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource —783Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetLlama 4 ScoutResult
AA-IFBenchSource —39.5%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 4 Scout on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 4 Scout today?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens Llama 4 Scout: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet
API / mo$13,500
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Llama 4 Scout
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$2,278
Break-even—
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 20, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.