GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) vs Llama 4 Maverick
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) by OpenAI 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
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) scores 29.1 points higher (38.4 vs 9.3) but costs 120× as much to run the benchmark ($5294 vs $44.0; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) | Llama 4 Maverick | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 38.4 | 9.3 | −75.8% Llama 4 Maverick is 75.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,294.36 | $43.98 | −99.2% Llama 4 Maverick is 99.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 55.87s | 10.45s | −81.3% Llama 4 Maverick is 81.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $30.0 | $0.25 / $0.92 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Maverick vs GPT-5.5 (Xhigh): 75.8% less intelligence, 99.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 81.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.5 (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.
GPT-5.5 (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/gpt-5-5/llama-4-maverick · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-5/llama-4-maverick?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill