CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Live
LeaderboardModelsCompareStacksBest ofGuidesNewsMethod
…
CompareLLM
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 4 Scout

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 4 Scout benchmark

This page compares Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking (Google) and Llama 4 Scout (Meta) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking is ahead by 78 points (1,490 vs 1,412; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking resolves 66.8% versus 52.4% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). Llama 4 Scout streams faster (155 tok/s) while Llama 4 Scout is the cheaper output token ($0.3/1M). Llama 4 Scout has the larger context window (1.3M tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Quick answer

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Llama 4 Scout is a dated snapshot, not a lab score. Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads preference Elo (1,490 vs 1,412). Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads SWE-bench coding. Llama 4 Scout is the cheaper output token. Elo is crowd preference, not an exam. Pick the column that matches the job.
Share Analysis:
WhatsAppTelegramX / PostLinkedInReddit

Google

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Google experimental reasoning model that visualizes thoughts in real-time.

Elo 1,490$0.4/1M out

Meta

Llama 4 Scout

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.

Elo 1,412$0.3/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A
Model B
Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5vs Claude Opus 4.6vs Claude Sonnet 4.5vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking (5)vsLlama 4 Scout (5)
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking: 5W (50%)Overall: Even matchupLlama 4 Scout: 5W (50%)
← Gemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingLlama 4 Scout →
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo
1,490vs1,412
Coding Elo
1,515vs1,398
SWE-bench
66.8%vs52.4%
LiveBench
67%vs59.6%
GPQA Diamond
81%vs71.2%
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking: 5WLlama 4 Scout: 0W
Llama 4 Scout (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed
115 tok/svs155 tok/s
Time to first token
220 msvs130 ms
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking: 0WLlama 4 Scout: 2W
Llama 4 Scout (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price
$0.4/1Mvs$0.3/1M
Input price
$0.1/1Mvs$0.1/1M
Context window
1Mvs1.3M
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking: 0WLlama 4 Scout: 3W
Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect
Percentile 0–100
Dimensional AdvantageEven 3–3
Preference Elo

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

78 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Llama 4 Scout

40 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Llama 4 Scout

$0.10/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—
Elo
High is better
+6%1,490
EloHigh is better
1,412
Code Elo
High is better
+8%1,515
Code EloHigh is better
1,398
LiveBench
High is better
+12%67%
LiveBenchHigh is better
59.6%
SWE-bench
High is better
+27%66.8%
SWE-benchHigh is better
52.4%
GPQA
High is better
+14%81%
GPQAHigh is better
71.2%
TTFT
Low is better
220 ms
TTFTLow is better
130 ms+69%
Speed
High is better
115 tok/s
SpeedHigh is better
155 tok/s+35%
In $
Low is better
$0.1/1M
In $Low is better
$0.1/1M
Out $
Low is better
$0.4/1M
Out $Low is better
$0.3/1M+33%
Context
High is better
1M
ContextHigh is better
1.3M+25%
Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 16% with Llama 4 Scout
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking$9.50 / mo
In: $3.50Out: $6.00
Llama 4 Scout$8.00 / mo
In: $3.50Out: $4.50
Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 4 Scout is estimated to save $1.50/month ($18/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking:Pick Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
  • 2
    Llama 4 Scout:Pick Llama 4 Scout when you are optimizing output cost.
  • 3
    Llama 4 Scout:Pick Llama 4 Scout when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Higher SWE-bench (66.8%).

High-volume chatLlama 4 Scout

Lower output list price ($0.3/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 4 Scout

Lower TTFT (130 ms).

Long-document RAGLlama 4 Scout

Larger window (1.3M).

Screenshots / visionGemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking).

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsGemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingHigher SWE-bench (66.8%).
High-volume chatLlama 4 ScoutLower output list price ($0.3/1M).
Voice / low-latency UILlama 4 ScoutLower TTFT (130 ms).
Long-document RAGLlama 4 ScoutLarger window (1.3M).
Screenshots / visionGemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingBoth accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking).

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news
compareAug 16, 2026

Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Scout: cheap Claude versus cheap open Llama

$1/$5 hosted Claude vs a cheap long-context open sibling. The alternative-to-Sonnet pair that is honest.

launchApr 8, 2026

Llama 4 Scout: long-context open sibling of Maverick

Huge window, cheap hosted lists. The Haiku alternative that is actually open-weight.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/gemini-2-flash-thinking-vs-llama-4-scout/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE
VS
Google

Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking

Elo 1,490
LiveBench67%
SWE-bench66.8%
Speed115 tok/s
Output cost$0.4/1M
Meta

Llama 4 Scout

Elo 1,412
LiveBench59.6%
SWE-bench52.4%
Speed155 tok/s
Output cost$0.3/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking or Llama 4 Scout?
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,490). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking or Llama 4 Scout?
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking leads SWE-bench at 66.8% vs 52.4%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Llama 4 Scout output tokens are $0.3/1M versus $0.4/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking or Llama 4 Scout?
Llama 4 Scout has the lower time-to-first-token (130 ms vs 220 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?
Llama 4 Scout accepts 1.3M tokens versus 1M.
Can I self-host either model?
Llama 4 Scout is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking and Llama 4 Scout Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Related news

  • compare · Aug 16, 2026

    Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Scout: cheap Claude versus cheap open Llama

  • launch · Apr 8, 2026

    Llama 4 Scout: long-context open sibling of Maverick

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking matchups →|All Llama 4 Scout matchups →
Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking vs Gemini 2.5 Flash (next gemini-flash)Llama 4 Scout vs Llama 4 Maverick (previous llama)Gemini 3 Flash vs Gemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingGemini 3.6 Flash vs Gemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingLlama 4 Maverick vs Gemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingGemini 3.7 Flash vs Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking