Claude Opus 5 (Low) vs Llama 4 Maverick
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Low) by Anthropic or Llama 4 Maverick by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Low) scores 30.1 points higher (39.4 vs 9.3) but costs 35× as much to run the benchmark ($1561 vs $44.0; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Low) when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Low) | Llama 4 Maverick | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.4 | 9.3 | −76.4% Llama 4 Maverick is 76.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,560.91 | $43.98 | −97.2% Llama 4 Maverick is 97.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.45s | 10.41s | −9.1% Llama 4 Maverick is 9.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.25 / $0.92 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Maverick vs Claude Opus 5 (Low): 76.4% less intelligence, 97.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 9.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- 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 (Low)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-low/llama-4-maverick · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-low/llama-4-maverick?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill