Model comparison
Llama 4 Scout vs Solar Pro4
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Solar Pro4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Meta
UpstageSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 4 Scout scores higher in 0 categories and Solar Pro4 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Solar Pro4 leads 40.1 to 20.2.
- Llama 4 Scout is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for Solar Pro4.
- Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Upstage |
| Noometry Index | 27.7 | 42.1 |
| Released | 2025-04-05 | 2026-08-06 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 524K |
| Max output | 4K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 20.2 (#339), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1286 | 1437 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 9.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1371 |
| SciCode | 17% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 43.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 4 Scout: 24.6 (#119), Solar Pro4: —
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 28.1% | — |
Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 9.1 (#345), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1266 | 1399 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 36.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 57.9% | — |
| LMCA | 12% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.64 | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.5 | — |
Math Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 19.6 (#286), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1287 | 1416 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 37.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 62.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 31.9 (#217), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1235 | 1427 |
| GPQA Diamond | 51.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 74.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 4 Scout: 32.2 (#102), Solar Pro4: —
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1118 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 34.2% | — |
Multilingual Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 41.0 (#212), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1252 | 1361 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1255 | 1415 |
| LMArena French | 1282 | 1397 |
| LMArena German | 1272 | 1364 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1206 | 1309 |
| LMArena Korean | 1207 | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | 1263 | 1360 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1278 | 1401 |
Instruction Following Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 65.8 (#217), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1248 | 1377 |
| IFEval | 81.8% | — |
Long Context Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#294), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1265 | 1381 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 36% | — |
Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads
Llama 4 Scout: 37.0 (#261), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1279 | 1386 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1249 | 1316 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1280 | 1385 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 783 | — |
| WildBench | 78% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 4 Scout better than Solar Pro4?
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Solar Pro4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout or Solar Pro4?
Llama 4 Scout is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Solar Pro4 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.
Is Llama 4 Scout or Solar Pro4 better for coding?
Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 4 Scout and Solar Pro4 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 4 Scout has 43 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.