Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Llama 4 Scout
44
1/8 categoriesSarvam 30B
48
Winner · 2/8 categoriesLlama 4 Scout· Sarvam 30B
Pick Sarvam 30B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Llama 4 Scout only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 10M context window.
Sarvam 30B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 48 to 44. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Sarvam 30B's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 86.5 against 47.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HumanEval, 39% to 92.1%. Llama 4 Scout does hit back in agentic, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Sarvam 30B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Llama 4 Scout is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Llama 4 Scout gives you the larger context window at 10M, compared with 64K for Sarvam 30B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Sarvam 30B |
|---|---|---|
| AgenticLlama 4 Scout wins | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 39% | — |
| BrowseComp | — | 35.5% |
| Coding | ||
| HumanEval | 39% | 92.1% |
| LiveCodeBench v6 | — | 70.0% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 34% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 60% | — |
| OfficeQA Pro | 55% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| MuSR | 43% | — |
| BBH | 60% | — |
| gpqaDiamond | — | 66.5% |
| KnowledgeSarvam 30B wins | ||
| SuperGPQA | 44% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 51% | 80% |
| SimpleQA | 45% | — |
| MMLU | — | 85.1% |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | 68% | — |
| Multilingual | ||
| MMLU-ProX | 58% | — |
| MathematicsSarvam 30B wins | ||
| AIME 2025 | 48% | 80% |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 43% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 45% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 44% | — |
| BRUMO 2025 | 46% | — |
| MATH-500 | — | 97% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 73.3% |
| HMMT Nov 2025 | — | 74.2% |
Sarvam 30B is ahead overall, 48 to 44. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HumanEval, where the scores are 39% and 92.1%.
Sarvam 30B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 80 versus 47.6. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Sarvam 30B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 86.5 versus 47.1. Inside this category, AIME 2025 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Llama 4 Scout has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 39 versus 35.5. Sarvam 30B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.