Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Llama 4 Scout delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,412 vs 1,295), while Llama 4 Scout leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (52.4%), while Llama 4 Scout is more budget-friendly at $0.3/1M per 1M output tokens, while Gemini 2.5 Flash provides faster response streaming (185 tok/s). Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.
9 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost
Previous Google speed workhorse.
Meta open-weight Llama 4 long-context sibling of Maverick. Common public API lists sit near $0.08–$0.30 / $0.30–$0.70 per 1M; we store a conservative hosted list until OpenRouter overwrites.
Currently comparing Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout. Alternative family tiers available.
Δ 117 Arena Elo pts
185 tok/s
$0.3 / 1M output
Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.
Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.
Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.
Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy
Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness
Cost per million tokens and max context window length
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +117 | ||
| Coding Elo | — | — | |
| LiveBench | +8.2% | ||
| SWE-bench | +4.4% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +3% | ||
| Time to first token | +20 ms | ||
| Output speed | 185 tok/s | 155 tok/s | +30 tok/s |
| Input price | $0.1/1M | $0.08/1M | +$0.02/1M |
| Output price | $0.4/1M | +$0.1/1M | |
| Context window | +9M |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
Llama 4 Scout is estimated to save $2.20/month ($26/year).
Higher SWE-bench (52.4%).
Lower output list price ($0.3/1M).
Lower TTFT (110 ms).
Larger window (10M).
Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Llama 4 Scout).
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Llama 4 Scout | Higher SWE-bench (52.4%). |
| High-volume chat | Llama 4 Scout | Lower output list price ($0.3/1M). |
| Voice / low-latency UI | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Lower TTFT (110 ms). |
| Long-document RAG | Llama 4 Scout | Larger window (10M). |
| Screenshots / vision | Llama 4 Scout | Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Llama 4 Scout). |
$1/$5 hosted Claude vs a cheap long-context open sibling. The alternative-to-Sonnet pair that is honest.
Huge window, cheap hosted lists. The Haiku alternative that is actually open-weight.
Useful as a cheap historical compare. 3.7 Flash is the 2026 volume SKU.
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/gemini-2-5-flash-vs-llama-4-scout/opengraph-image
Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry