# Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout

> Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-5-flash-vs-llama-4-scout
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 39

## Summary

- They share 39 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 10 categories and Llama 4 Scout in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 39.9 to 19.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 7.8% for Llama 4 Scout.
- Llama 4 Scout is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 27.7 |
| Rank | 170 | 330 |
| Context | 1.05M | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $2.50 | $0.30 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220)
- Llama 4 Scout: 20.2 (#339)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | 9.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | 1286 |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| SciCode | — | 17% |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 43.1% |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74)
- Llama 4 Scout: 24.6 (#119)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | 28.1% |
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286)
- Llama 4 Scout: 9.1 (#345)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | 36.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | 0.5% |
| CritPt | 1.1% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1266 |
| DTBench | 76.5% | 57.9% |
| LMCA | 27.5% | 12% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | 129.64 |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | 57.5 |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98)
- Llama 4 Scout: 19.6 (#286)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | 7.8% |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | 37.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1415 | 1287 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | 0% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 62.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168)
- Llama 4 Scout: 31.9 (#217)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | 74.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | 7.7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | 50.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | 1235 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 51.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32)
- Llama 4 Scout: 32.2 (#102)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | 1118 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | 34.2% |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88)
- Llama 4 Scout: 41.0 (#212)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | 1255 |
| LMArena French | 1433 | 1282 |
| LMArena German | 1418 | 1272 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | 1206 |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | 1263 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | 1278 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54)
- Llama 4 Scout: 65.8 (#217)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 89.8% | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1248 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17)
- Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#294)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | 36% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1265 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157)
- Llama 4 Scout: 37.0 (#261)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | 1279 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1249 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | 783 |
| WildBench | 81.7% | 78% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1280 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Llama 4 Scout?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.

### Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or Llama 4 Scout better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.8 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Llama 4 Scout share?

39 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Scout has 43.