Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) vs Llama 4 Maverick
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Llama 4 Maverick by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 44.3 points higher (53.6 vs 9.3) but costs 49× as much to run the benchmark ($2172 vs $44.0; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) | Llama 4 Maverick | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.6 | 9.3 | −82.6% Llama 4 Maverick is 82.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,172.43 | $43.98 | −98.0% Llama 4 Maverick is 98.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 33.81s | 11.18s | −66.9% Llama 4 Maverick is 66.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.25 / $0.92 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Maverick vs Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback): 82.6% less intelligence, 98.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 66.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Llama 4 Maverick is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback)Llama 4 MaverickToday'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/claude-opus-5-5-high/llama-4-maverick · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-high/llama-4-maverick?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill