GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) vs Llama 4 Scout
Which is better for the money: GPT-6.1 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-6.1 Terra (Low) scores 29.7 points higher (36.2 vs 6.5) but costs 1.6× as much to run the benchmark ($115 vs $73.6; both mid-range class). Pick GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Llama 4 Scout.
| Metric | GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) | Llama 4 Scout | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 36.2 | 6.5 | −82.0% Llama 4 Scout is 82.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $114.52 | $73.56 | −35.8% Llama 4 Scout is 35.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.78s | 6.47s | −4.6% Llama 4 Scout is 4.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.00 / $5.00 | $0.18 / $0.66 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-6.1 Terra (Low): 82.0% less intelligence, 35.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 4.6% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
GPT-6.1 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-6-1-terra-low/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-1-terra-low/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill