Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Llama 4 Scout
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.6 #32 (Supported); Llama 4 Scout #174 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Llama 4 Scout share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.6; 4 to Llama 4 Scout.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
- 19
- Llama 4 Scout only
- 4
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Llama 4 Scout is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 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 Sonnet 4.6 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 Sonnet 4.6.
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 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Δ | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 4.665.2 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 4.669.1 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 4.666.0 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
| Math | Claude Sonnet 4.626.4 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Sonnet 4.677.4 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 32.400%B 0.000%Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 32.4FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 32.400%; Llama 4 Scout scored 0.000%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Llama 4 Scout | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.6$3 input / $15 output | Llama 4 Scout$0 input / $0 output | Llama 4 Scout has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 4.644 tok/s | Llama 4 Scout128 tok/s | Llama 4 Scout has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 4.61.48 s | Llama 4 Scout0.70 s | Llama 4 Scout reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.6200K | Llama 4 Scout10M | Llama 4 Scout lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Llama 4 Scout | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.1% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 72.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 67.8% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 65.2% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 79.5% | 15.5% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 62.92% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 8.3% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 36.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 1.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 0.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 90 | Not comparable |
Coding8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Llama 4 Scout | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 79.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | 60.7% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 80.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 51.48% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | 48.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 46.9% | 17.0% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 24.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 8.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Llama 4 Scout | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 89.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | 95% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 79.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 49% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 35.9% | 10.0% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 79.9% | 58.7% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 13.2% | 4.3% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -2.9% | -52.4% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.0% | 14.6% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 65.9% | 78.3% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Llama 4 Scout | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 41.2% | 39.5% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 Sonnet 4.6 and Llama 4 Scout today?
Claude Sonnet 4.6: $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.
Related Comparisons
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.