GPT-5.6 Terra (Low) vs Llama 4 Scout
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Terra (Low) by OpenAI or Llama 4 Scout by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5.6 Terra (Low) scores 21.0 points higher (27.5 vs 6.5) but costs 4.8× as much to run the benchmark ($350 vs $73.6; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.6 Terra (Low) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Terra (Low) | Llama 4 Scout | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 27.5 | 6.5 | −76.4% Llama 4 Scout is 76.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $350.36 | $73.56 | −79.0% Llama 4 Scout is 79.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 5.49s | 6.47s | +17.9% Llama 4 Scout is 17.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $12.0 | $0.18 / $0.66 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-5.6 Terra (Low): 76.4% less intelligence, 79.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 17.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Terra (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
GPT-5.6 Terra (Low)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/gpt-5-6-terra-low/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-terra-low/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill