GPT-6.1 Sol vs Llama 4 Scout
Updated October 21, 2026. 49 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 88.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 9.1 for Llama 4 Scout.
Pick Llama 4 Scout when output tokens cost 33.3x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.31M against 1.05M tokens.
- Shared results
- 49
- GPT-6.1 Sol only
- 46
- Llama 4 Scout only
- 31
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, four public coding benchmarks
GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol scores 88.7 against 9.1.
2 and 1 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol leads, 51.8 against 6.5.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Llama 4 Scout has a AA Agentic Index result, 0.5.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Llama 4 Scout has a GPQA Diamond result, 47.0%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Llama 4 Scout has a AIME result, 19.0%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Llama 4 Scout has a MMLU Pro result, 69.6%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol leads, 1321 against 750.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
No call
Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a Vals Index result, 63.9%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Llama 4 Scout
Llama 4 Scout takes 1.31M tokens against 1.05M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Llama 4 Scout
GPT-6.1 Sol $0.0070, Llama 4 Scout $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Llama 4 Scout has the number, $1.276.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-6.1 Sol 88.7 from 2 benchmarks, Llama 4 Scout 9.1 from 1 benchmark.
- Widest category
- Web design, 67.0 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- ARC-AGI: GPT-6.1 Sol 98.5% against Llama 4 Scout 0.5%, 98.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-6.1 Sol $10.00 against Llama 4 Scout $0.30 per million output tokens, 33.3x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-6.1 Sol takes 1.05M 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.
| Category | GPT-6.1 Sol | Bars | Llama 4 Scout | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 3 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 9 | 0 | ||
| Math | 3 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 5 | 0 | ||
| Web design | 5 | 0 | ||
| General | 22 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 49 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 9.1% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LiveBench coding | 96.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1753 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 8.2 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.5% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 55.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 88.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 65.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 3.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | 96.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | 43.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | 39.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 29.9% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| SciCode | 55.8% | 21.3% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 1.5% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| FrontierCode | 50.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ALE-Bench | 2743.8 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1478 | 1286 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1476 | 1286 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1754 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1800 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | 1702 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 51.8 | 6.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 168.4 | 129.6 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 0.5 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1190 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: spreadsheets | 1250 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench research | 83.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench browser | 88.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | 73.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | 50.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 52.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 21.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 38.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 6.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 70.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 79.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 52.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Vals Science Index | 59.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Robo-bench (Vals AI) | 28.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 15.5% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| APEX-Agents | 60.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SpireClimb | 24.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index90
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 47.0% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LiveBench reasoning | 92.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 46.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 58.8% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 58.7% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 52.9% | 3.8% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 95.4% | 51.8% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| ARC-AGI | 98.5% | 0.5% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 94.2% | 0.0% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Chess puzzles | 68.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 80.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| EBR-bench | 54.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1463 | 1266 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1489 | 1235 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1465 | 1293 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1306 | 1125 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1356 | 1148 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 19.0% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.2% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | Not measured | 88.0% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 14.0 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 14.0% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 100.0% | 7.8% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 93.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 100.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ProofBench | 99.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MATH level 5 | Not measured | 62.3% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1489 | 1287 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1513 | 1286 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 69.6% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.0% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 46.8% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 55.2% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.8% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.9% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 48.8% | 23.3% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 75.2% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1444 | 1278 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1433 | 1275 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1471 | 1285 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1445 | 1257 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1321 | 750 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1321 | 767 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1389 | 773 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1278 | 896 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1461 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1345 | 790 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LiveBench design | 82.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index220
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 63.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | 82.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 59.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 46.5% | 34.8% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 86.5% | 50.6% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| IFBench | Not measured | 39.5% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 84.0% | 27.7% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| DTBench | 96.5% | 57.9% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMCA | 62.8% | 12.0% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 36.0% | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| Furniture assembly | 80.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text | 1443 | 1279 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1466 | 1248 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1425 | 1249 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | 1118 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: English | 1450 | 1304 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1433 | 1252 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1487 | 1255 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1273 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1206 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1207 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1460 | 1283 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1439 | 1278 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1457 | 1263 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1265 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1442 | 1280 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1458 | 1265 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1444 | 1269 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1426 | 1242 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1274 | 1143 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1106 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1289 | 1117 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1102 | Only Llama 4 Scout measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1301 | 1126 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Llama 4 Scout | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Llama 4 Scout costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Llama 4 Scout costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol | Meta Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Meta Llama |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | September 29, 2026 | April 5, 2025 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.31M |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.00 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $0.30 |
| Coding index | 88.7 | 9.1 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.276 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Llama 4 Scout for coding?
Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 88.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 9.1 for Llama 4 Scout. Pick Llama 4 Scout when output tokens cost 33.3x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.31M against 1.05M tokens.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol or Llama 4 Scout?
GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Llama 4 Scout costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for Llama 4 Scout only.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-6.1 Sol or Llama 4 Scout?
Llama 4 Scout, with 1.31M tokens against 1.05M.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Sol vs Llama 4 Scout comparison based on?
49 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-6.1 Sol's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Llama 4 Scout's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.