Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Llama 4 Scout
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Llama 4 Scout by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallbac… scores 29.4 points higher (35.9 vs 6.5) but costs 6.6× as much to run the benchmark ($482 vs $73.6; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) | Llama 4 Scout | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 35.9 | 6.5 | −81.9% Llama 4 Scout is 81.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $482.13 | $73.56 | −84.7% Llama 4 Scout is 84.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 5.91s | 4.97s | −15.9% Llama 4 Scout is 15.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $0.18 / $0.66 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Scout vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback): 81.9% less intelligence, 84.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 15.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback)Llama 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/claude-sonnet-5-5-low/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5-low/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill