Compare
Llama 4 Scout vs Claude Opus 4.7
Meta vs Anthropic. 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.
Meta
Llama 4 ScoutThe 70B workhorse open-weight. Fits on a single H100, beloved by self-hosters.
Single-GPU deployableDirt cheap on aggregatorsStrong fine-tuning base
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic’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
Pricing
Input / 1M$0.35$15.00
Output / 1M$0.80$75.00
Context128K1.0M
Max output8K64K
LicenseOpen weightsProprietary
Released2025-12-102026-03-12
Benchmarks
LMSYS ELO1265.01412.0
MMLU Pro77.292.8
HumanEval82.494.4
SWE-Bench—72.1
MATH72.589.3
GPQA—66.4
MMMU—79.2
IFEval84.192.1
Per-task cost
Summarize a 1-hour meeting transcript$0.0057$0.263
Review a 500-line pull request$0.0044$0.270
Answer a customer support ticket$0.0017$0.105
Extract structured data from a resume$0.0026$0.150
Debug a stack trace with context$0.0037$0.240
Per-call cost using published token counts for each task. Real-world prompts vary.