Skip to main content

Model profile

Llama 4 Scout

MetaCurrentReleased Feb 28, 2026
Data verified
Overall Score
39.87Public #174 of 200Verified #80 of 99
Arena Elo
1322
Eligible category ranks
2of 8
Price (1M tokens)
$0 in / $0 out
API pricing
Speed
128tok/s
Context
10M

Evidence coverage

18 of 321 tracked benchmarks are published. 1 is verified and 17 provisional. 7 of 8 categories are measured.

Updated July 20, 2026Methodology
Published / tracked
18 / 321
Verified
1
Provisional
17
Categories with evidence
7 / 8

Evidence by category

  • Agentic4 benchmarks
    Reported
  • Coding2 benchmarks
    Reported
  • Reasoning2 benchmarks
    Reported
  • Knowledge6 benchmarks
    Reported
  • Math1 benchmark
    Verified
  • Multilingual0 benchmarks
    Not measured
  • Multimodal2 benchmarks
    Reported
  • Inst. Following1 benchmark
    Reported
Open WeightSelf-hostNon-Reasoning
Confidence:
Low
base

Llama 4 Scout ranks #174 out of 200 models on the public leaderboard with an overall score of 39.87/100. It also ranks #80 out of 99 on the verified leaderboard. While not a frontier model, it offers specific advantages depending on the use case.

Llama 4 Scout is a open weight model with a 10M token context window. It processes queries without explicit chain-of-thought reasoning, offering faster response times and lower token usage.

This profile currently has 18 of 321 tracked benchmarks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated benchmark rows publicly, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.

Its strongest category is Agentic (#107), while its weakest is Coding (#110). This performance profile makes it particularly useful for coding agents, browser research, and computer-use workflows.

Peer position

Exact provisional scores and ranks for the closest listed peers. A score can appear before a model clears the evidence threshold for a rank, so equal scores can have different rank states.

Range 39.5240.43

  1. Grok 3 [Beta]
    xAI
    #17140.43
    Grok 3 [Beta] is #171 with a score of 40.43.
    Compare
  2. Ministral 3 8B (Reasoning)
    Mistral
    #17240.38
    Ministral 3 8B (Reasoning) is #172 with a score of 40.38.
    Compare
  3. Mistral 7B v0.3
    Mistral
    #17339.9
    Mistral 7B v0.3 is #173 with a score of 39.9.
    Compare
  4. Llama 4 ScoutCurrent model
    Meta
    #17439.87
    Llama 4 Scout is #174 with a score of 39.87.
  5. Qwen2.5-VL-32B
    Alibaba
    #17539.85
    Qwen2.5-VL-32B is #175 with a score of 39.85.
    Compare
  6. Llama 4 Behemoth
    Meta
    #17639.8
    Llama 4 Behemoth is #176 with a score of 39.8.
    Compare
  7. Ministral 3 3B (Reasoning)
    Mistral
    #17739.52
    Ministral 3 3B (Reasoning) is #177 with a score of 39.52.
    Compare

Category percentile

More

Relative position among models eligible for each sourced category. A higher percentile means a stronger position within that category's ranked cohort; 100 is highest.

  1. Agentic10%
    Eligible cohort rank #107 of 119Category score 35.0
  2. Coding10%
    Eligible cohort rank #110 of 122Category score 36.3

Category evidence

Scores and ranks appear only where this model has published benchmark evidence. Categories without displayable source records remain not measured.

Category scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank #107 of 119Percentile 10thWeight 22%4 benchmarksReported35.0
CodingRank #110 of 122Percentile 10thWeight 20%2 benchmarksReported36.3
ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%2 benchmarksReported64.9
KnowledgeRank Not rankedWeight 12%6 benchmarksReported27.5
MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified25.4
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measuredNot measured
MultimodalRank Not rankedWeight 12%2 benchmarksReported58.0
Inst. FollowingRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkReported67.2

Self-host vs API cost

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

Llama 4 Scout
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$2,278
Break-even
Model the full break-even

Chatbot Arena performance

Scroll horizontally to inspect confidence intervals and vote counts.

Chatbot Arena Elo, confidence interval, and vote count by evaluation view
ViewEloConfidence intervalVotes
Text Overall1322Not availableNot available

Benchmark Details

Rows below have a displayable published verification record. Each source link and provenance note remains in the page HTML while its category is closed. Source-unverified manual rows and generated rows stay hidden.

Agentic4 benchmarks
AA Agentic IndexReported

Artificial Analysis Agentic Index

1.1%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
τ²-bench resultsReported

τ²-Bench Tool-Agent-User Evaluation

15.5%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
GDPval-AAReported

GDPval-AA normalized

0.0%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
GDPval-AAReported
90Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
Coding2 benchmarks
AA Coding IndexReported

Artificial Analysis Coding Index

8.2%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
AA-SciCodeReported

Artificial Analysis SciCode

17.0%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
Reasoning2 benchmarks
AA-LCRReported

Artificial Analysis Long Context Reasoning

25.8%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
CritPtReported

Critical Physics Tasks

0.0%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
Knowledge6 benchmarks
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexReported
10.0%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
AA-GPQA DiamondReported

Artificial Analysis GPQA Diamond

58.7%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
AA-HLEReported

Artificial Analysis Humanity's Last Exam

4.3%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
AA-Omniscience IndexReported

Artificial Analysis Omniscience Index

-52.4%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
AA-Omniscience AccuracyReported

Artificial Analysis Omniscience Accuracy

14.6%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateReported

Artificial Analysis Omniscience Hallucination Rate

78.3%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
Math1 benchmark
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Benchmark exact

FrontierMath v2 Tiers 1-3

0.000%Weighted 30%
Source: Epoch AI FrontierMath v2 leaderboardProvenance: Epoch AI reports FrontierMath v2 Tiers 1-3 at 0% for Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct. BenchLM selects the highest published thinking effort for the model and stores the v2 benchmark slice separately.
Multimodal2 benchmarks
AA-MMMU-ProReported

Artificial Analysis MMMU-Pro

52.9%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
Design Arena WebsiteReported

Design Arena Website Elo

783Display only
Source: OpenRouter model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only Design Arena Website Elo synced from OpenRouter model benchmark metadata. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.
Inst. Following1 benchmark
AA-IFBenchReported

Artificial Analysis IFBench

39.5%Display only
Source: Artificial Analysis model benchmarksProvenance: Display-only row synced from the current Artificial Analysis model payload. It is excluded from BenchLM weighted scoring.

Frequently Asked Questions

How does Llama 4 Scout perform overall in AI benchmarks?

Llama 4 Scout has 18 published benchmark scores on BenchLM, but it does not yet have enough non-generated coverage to receive a global overall rank.

Is Llama 4 Scout good for knowledge and understanding?

Llama 4 Scout has visible benchmark coverage in knowledge and understanding, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.

Is Llama 4 Scout good for coding and programming?

Llama 4 Scout ranks #110 out of 122 models in coding and programming benchmarks with an average score of 36.3. There are stronger options in this category.

Is Llama 4 Scout good for mathematics?

Llama 4 Scout has visible benchmark coverage in mathematics, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.

Is Llama 4 Scout good for reasoning and logic?

Llama 4 Scout has visible benchmark coverage in reasoning and logic, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.

Is Llama 4 Scout good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

Llama 4 Scout ranks #107 out of 119 models in agentic tool use and computer tasks benchmarks with an average score of 35. There are stronger options in this category.

Is Llama 4 Scout good for multimodal and grounded tasks?

Llama 4 Scout has visible benchmark coverage in multimodal and grounded tasks, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.

Is Llama 4 Scout good for instruction following?

Llama 4 Scout has visible benchmark coverage in instruction following, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.

Is Llama 4 Scout open source?

Yes, Llama 4 Scout is an open weight model created by Meta, meaning it can be downloaded and run locally or fine-tuned for specific use cases.

Does Llama 4 Scout have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

Not yet. Llama 4 Scout currently has 18 published benchmark scores out of the 321 benchmarks BenchLM tracks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated public benchmark rows, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.

What is the context window size of Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout has a published context window of 10M, which determines how much text it can process in a single interaction.

Last updated: July 20, 2026 · Runtime metrics stay blank until BenchLM has a sourced snapshot.

Choose with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, new releases, pricing changes, and the evidence behind them.

Free. One email per week.