Model comparison

Llama 3.1-405B vs Solar Pro4

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Solar Pro4 Upstage

42.1

Rank #121 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-405B scores higher in 0 categories and Solar Pro4 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Solar Pro4 leads 38.8 to 18.4.
  • Llama 3.1-405B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-405B and Solar Pro4 specifications
Llama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
ProviderMetaUpstage
Noometry Index30.742.1
Released2024-07-232026-08-06
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—524K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.30
Output $ / M tokens—$1.20
Results tracked4218

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Coding12911437
LMArena WebDev—1371
WeirdML21.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140), Solar Pro4: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
TheAgentCompany7.4%—
Cybench7.5%—

Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Hard Prompts12691399
SimpleBench23%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark45%—
DTBench61.4%—
BIG-Bench Hard82.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index128.75—
ForecastBench59.9—
HellaSwag89.2%—
PIQA85.9%—
WinoGrande89.2%—

Math Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Math12811416
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20259.7%—
Omni-MATH24.9%—
MATH Level 549.8%—

Knowledge Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Expert12431427
GPQA Diamond50.9%—
MMLU-Pro72.3%—
Confabulations17.6%—
GPQA (HELM)52.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge95.3%—
MMLU84.5%—
TriviaQA82.7%—

Multilingual Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Non-English12481361
LMArena Chinese12421415
LMArena French12791397
LMArena German12521364
LMArena Japanese12081309
LMArena Korean11841382
LMArena Russian12651360
LMArena Spanish12601401

Instruction Following Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following12591377
IFEval81.1%—

Long Context Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Longer Query12661381

Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BSolar Pro4
LMArena Text12841386
LMArena Creative Writing12621316
LMArena Multi-Turn12971385
EQ-Bench Creative Writing870—
WildBench78.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-405B better than Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-405B or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-405B and Solar Pro4 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-405B has 42 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper