# GPT-5.4 Pro vs Llama 4 Scout

> GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 450× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-4-pro-vs-llama-4-scout
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 7

## Summary

- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 Pro scores higher in 4 categories and Llama 4 Scout in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.4 Pro leads 70.7 to 9.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 94.5% for GPT-5.4 Pro and 0.5% for Llama 4 Scout.
- Llama 4 Scout is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 58.9 | 27.7 |
| Rank | 18 | 330 |
| Context | 1.05M | 128K |
| Input $/M | $30 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $180 | $0.30 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 43.2 (#90)
- Llama 4 Scout: 20.2 (#339)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9.1% |
| SciCode | — | 17% |
| WeirdML | 57.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1286 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 43.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 24.6 (#119)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.1% |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 70.7 (#13)
- Llama 4 Scout: 9.1 (#345)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 83.3% | 0% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | 0.5% |
| CritPt | 30% | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.93 | 129.64 |
| SimpleBench | 74.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 36.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 58.6% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1266 |
| DTBench | — | 57.9% |
| LMCA | — | 12% |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.5 |

## Math

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.4 (#22)
- Llama 4 Scout: 19.6 (#286)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 50% | 0% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 58.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.8% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1287 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 62.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 37.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#7)
- Llama 4 Scout: 31.9 (#217)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.6% | 51.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.3% | 7.7% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 44.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 74.2% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 50.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1235 |

## Multimodal

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 32.2 (#102)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1118 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 34.2% |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 41.0 (#212)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1255 |
| LMArena French | — | 1282 |
| LMArena German | — | 1272 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1206 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1278 |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 65.8 (#217)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1248 |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#294)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 36% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1265 |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.4 Pro: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 37.0 (#261)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1249 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 783 |
| WildBench | — | 78% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1280 |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.4 Pro better than Llama 4 Scout?

GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 450× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Pro 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-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.

### Is GPT-5.4 Pro or Llama 4 Scout better for coding?

GPT-5.4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.2 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 Pro and Llama 4 Scout share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 Pro has 16 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Scout has 43.