# GPT-4o mini vs Llama 4 Scout

> Llama 4 Scout is the stronger model overall, scoring 27.4 to 25.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-4o-mini-vs-llama-4-scout
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 33

## Summary

- They share 33 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4o mini scores higher in 5 categories and Llama 4 Scout in 5 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Llama 4 Scout leads 31.8 to 17.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 57.4% for GPT-4o mini and 43.1% for Llama 4 Scout.
- Llama 4 Scout is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.60 for GPT-4o mini.
- Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 25.4 | 27.4 |
| Rank | 337 | 323 |
| Context | 128K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $0.30 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-4o mini: 21.6 (#330)
- Llama 4 Scout: 19.9 (#334)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1290 | 1286 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.4% | 43.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9.1% |
| Aider Polyglot | 3.6% | — |
| SciCode | — | 17% |
| WeirdML | 11.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 43.1% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 83.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 72.2% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-4o mini: 27.2 (#95)
- Llama 4 Scout: 24.4 (#109)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.1% |
| BALROG | 17.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-4o mini: 8.7 (#343)
- Llama 4 Scout: 9.2 (#339)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | 36.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1267 | 1266 |
| DTBench | 54.4% | 57.9% |
| LMCA | 10.4% | 12% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 126.56 | 129.64 |
| SimpleBench | 10.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 0.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 32.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 12% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 50% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.5 |
| LiveBench | 41.3% | — |
| PIQA | 88.7% | — |

## Math

- GPT-4o mini: 9.9 (#307)
- Llama 4 Scout: 18.4 (#280)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 6.9% | 7.8% |
| Omni-MATH | 28% | 37.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1267 | 1286 |
| MATH Level 5 | 52.6% | 62.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 36.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0% |
| GSM8K | 91.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-4o mini: 17.7 (#279)
- Llama 4 Scout: 31.8 (#208)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 37.7% | 51.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 60.3% | 74.2% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 36.8% | 50.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1235 | 1236 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 8.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 37.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.7% |
| BoolQ | 88.7% | — |
| MMLU | 81.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-4o mini: 25.3 (#117)
- Llama 4 Scout: 31.6 (#98)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1066 | 1118 |
| Video-MME | 64.8% | — |
| GeoBench | 64% | — |
| VPCT | 34% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 34.2% |

## Multilingual

- GPT-4o mini: 42.2 (#194)
- Llama 4 Scout: 41.3 (#207)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1266 | 1253 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1264 | 1256 |
| LMArena French | 1296 | 1283 |
| LMArena German | 1272 | 1274 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1216 | 1209 |
| LMArena Korean | 1195 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1275 | 1263 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1276 | 1277 |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-4o mini: 62.1 (#234)
- Llama 4 Scout: 66.0 (#212)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 78.2% | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1259 | 1248 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 56.8% | — |

## Long Context

- GPT-4o mini: 39.1 (#181)
- Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#289)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1289 | 1265 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 36% |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-4o mini: 39.7 (#243)
- Llama 4 Scout: 37.1 (#256)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1286 | 1279 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1268 | 1249 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 873 | 783 |
| WildBench | 79.1% | 78% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1285 | 1281 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 67.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 28.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-4o mini better than Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout is the stronger model overall, scoring 27.4 to 25.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-4o mini 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; GPT-4o mini lists at $0.15 and $0.60.

### Is GPT-4o mini or Llama 4 Scout better for coding?

GPT-4o mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 21.6 versus 19.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 128K tokens.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-4o mini and Llama 4 Scout share?

33 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4o mini has 60 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Scout has 43.