Apodex 1.1 vs Llama 4 Scout
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Llama 4 Scout by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Apodex 1.1 scores 19.9 points higher (26.4 vs 6.5) but costs 13× as much to run the benchmark ($939 vs $73.6; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Apodex 1.1 when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Llama 4 Scout | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 6.5 | −75.4% Llama 4 Scout is 75.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $73.56 | −92.2% Llama 4 Scout is 92.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 4.99s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $0.18 / $0.66 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Scout vs Apodex 1.1: 75.4% less intelligence, 92.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Apodex 1.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
Apodex 1.1Llama 4 ScoutToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill