Compare

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Llama 4 Scout

Anthropic vs Meta. Specs, benchmarks, and real per-task cost — all in one page.

Verdict

Claude Opus 4.7 leads on LMSYS ELO (1412 vs 1265). Llama 4 Scout is ~64.9× cheaper on a 3:1 input:output blend. Llama 4 Scout is open-weights, the other is proprietary.

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.7

Anthropic’s frontier reasoning model. Leads SWE-Bench and holds top ranks on long-context coding and agentic workflows.

Best-in-class coding agent behaviorStrong instruction following1M-token context with high recallHigh reliability under tool use

Meta

Llama 4 Scout

The 70B workhorse open-weight. Fits on a single H100, beloved by self-hosters.

Single-GPU deployableDirt cheap on aggregatorsStrong fine-tuning base

Pricing

Input / 1M$15.00$0.35

Output / 1M$75.00$0.80

Context1.0M128K

Max output64K8K

LicenseProprietaryOpen weights

Released2026-03-122025-12-10

Benchmarks

LMSYS ELO1412.01265.0

MMLU Pro92.877.2

HumanEval94.482.4

SWE-Bench72.1—

MATH89.372.5

GPQA66.4—

MMMU79.2—

IFEval92.184.1

Per-task cost

Summarize a 1-hour meeting transcript$0.263$0.0057

Review a 500-line pull request$0.270$0.0044

Answer a customer support ticket$0.105$0.0017

Extract structured data from a resume$0.150$0.0026

Debug a stack trace with context$0.240$0.0037

Per-call cost using published token counts for each task. Real-world prompts vary.

Tool

Interactive compare →

Add up to four models, tweak tasks live.