Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) vs Llama 4 Maverick
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) 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 (Xhigh) scores 40.4 points higher (49.7 vs 9.3) but costs 133× as much to run the benchmark ($5868 vs $44.0; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) | Llama 4 Maverick | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 49.7 | 9.3 | −81.3% Llama 4 Maverick is 81.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,867.76 | $43.98 | −99.3% Llama 4 Maverick is 99.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 35.31s | 11.18s | −68.3% Llama 4 Maverick is 68.3% 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 (Xhigh): 81.3% less intelligence, 99.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 68.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- 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 (Xhigh)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-xhigh/llama-4-maverick · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-xhigh/llama-4-maverick?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill