Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Llama 4 Scout

GPT-5.4 Nano leads Llama 4 Scout on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.7 to 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout costs 2.5x less per output token ($0.50 vs $1.25 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 66 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-5.4 Nano Replace Llama 4 Scout
GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI
Coding
44.8
Overall
45.7
Output $/M
$1.25
66
Llama 4 ScoutMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
24.9
Output $/M
$0.50
0
vs boards won of 66 shared

GPT-5.4 Nano or Llama 4 Scout: which to pick

Only GPT-5.4 Nano has a coding score, 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 4 Scout has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Llama 4 Scout for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.50 vs $1.25 per million) and a larger context window (1.31M against 400K tokens).

Model AGPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI44.8/1002 independent benchmarks$0.14 per solved taskModel BLlama 4 ScoutMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmark$1.276 per solved task
Shared results
66
GPT-5.4 Nano only
19
Llama 4 Scout only
16
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.4 Nano 44.8 from 2 benchmarks, Llama 4 Scout not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 47.5 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GPT-5.4 Nano 87.8% against Llama 4 Scout 7.8%, 80.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.4 Nano $1.25 against Llama 4 Scout $0.50 per million output tokens, 2.5x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.4 Nano takes 400K tokens, Llama 4 Scout 1.31M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-5.4 NanoBarsLlama 4 ScoutTies
Coding60
Intelligence20
Agentic work20
Reasoning130
Math40
Knowledge100
General290
All shared boards660
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured9.1%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
AA Coding Index56.18.2GPT-5.4 Nano
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)84.0%38.5%GPT-5.4 Nano
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)26.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Code migration (Vals AI)14.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)41.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured29.9%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
SciCode47.2%21.3%GPT-5.4 Nano
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)42.4%1.5%GPT-5.4 Nano
WeirdML49.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ALE-Bench1004.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding14041286GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: software and IT14021286GPT-5.4 Nano
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
AA Intelligence Index20.76.5GPT-5.4 Nano
Epoch Capabilities Index146.0129.6GPT-5.4 Nano
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
AA Agentic Index16.00.5GPT-5.4 Nano
Finance Agent (Vals AI)38.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)5.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.0%15.5%GPT-5.4 Nano
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured28.1%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index130
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
GPQA Diamond77.5%47.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)73.6%58.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)81.7%58.7%GPT-5.4 Nano
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.3%3.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)78.5%51.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
ARC-AGI51.5%0.5%GPT-5.4 Nano
ARC-AGI-25.7%0.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
Chess puzzles45.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzles9.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13811266GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: expert13961235GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13871293GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision: diagrams12101125GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision: homework12251148GPT-5.4 Nano
Kagi LLM Benchmark39.7%36.9%GPT-5.4 Nano
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
AIME88.8%19.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured79.2%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured88.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
AA Math IndexNot measured14.0Only Llama 4 Scout measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured14.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
OTIS Mock AIME87.8%7.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 344.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 412.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ProofBench5.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MATH level 5Not measured62.3%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Text: math14051287GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: mathematical work14091286GPT-5.4 Nano
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index100
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
MMLU Pro77.2%69.6%GPT-5.4 Nano
LegalBench (Vals AI)77.9%72.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.2%46.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
TaxEval (Vals AI)67.4%55.2%GPT-5.4 Nano
MortgageTax (Vals AI)59.1%57.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured50.9%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.0%23.3%GPT-5.4 Nano
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured75.2%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
SimpleQA Verified11.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science13741278GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13691275GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: legal and government13681285GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: business and finance13661257GPT-5.4 Nano
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured750Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured765Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured772Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured896Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured789Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index290
General benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)38.1%34.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
MedScribe (Vals AI)77.1%50.6%GPT-5.4 Nano
Vals Multimodal Index47.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
IFBench75.9%39.5%GPT-5.4 Nano
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)76.7%27.7%GPT-5.4 Nano
DTBench80.3%57.9%GPT-5.4 Nano
LMCA36.9%12.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured36.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Text13721279GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: instruction following13621248GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: creative writing13151249GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision11961118GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: English13811304GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: non-English13591252GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: Chinese13911255GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: German13681273GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: Japanese13431206GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: Korean13211207GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: French13951283GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: Spanish13711278GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: Russian13631263GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: Polish13661265GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: multi-turn13821280GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: longer queries13651265GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: writing and language13381269GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13251242GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision: English12021143GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision: Chinese12321106GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision: reading text12041117GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision: humor11611102GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing11591126GPT-5.4 Nano
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoLlama 4 ScoutLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.0008Fits in one request
Llama 4 Scout$0.0004Fits in one request

Llama 4 Scout costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.014Fits in one request
Llama 4 Scout$0.010Fits in one request

Llama 4 Scout costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.052Fits in one request
Llama 4 Scout$0.040Fits in one request

Llama 4 Scout costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-5.4 Nano and Llama 4 Scout
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.4 NanoMeta Llama 4 Scout
MakerOpenAIMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 17, 2026April 5, 2025
Context window400K1.31M
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.175
Output $/Mtok$1.25$0.50
Coding index44.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved task$0.14$1.276
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.4 Nano better than Llama 4 Scout for coding?

Only GPT-5.4 Nano has a coding score, 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 4 Scout has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 4 Scout for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.50 vs $1.25 per million) and a larger context window (1.31M against 400K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Nano or Llama 4 Scout?

GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Llama 4 Scout costs $0.175 and $0.50. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.14 and Llama 4 Scout $1.276.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.4 Nano or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout, with 1.31M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.4 Nano vs Llama 4 Scout comparison based on?

66 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.4 Nano's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Llama 4 Scout's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next