GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) vs Llama 4 Scout
Which is better for the money: GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) 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 (Medium) scores 34.8 points higher (41.3 vs 6.5) but costs 2.4× as much to run the benchmark ($175 vs $73.6; both mid-range class). Pick GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Llama 4 Scout.
| Metric | GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) | Llama 4 Scout | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.3 | 6.5 | −84.3% Llama 4 Scout is 84.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $175.20 | $73.56 | −58.0% Llama 4 Scout is 58.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.95s | 6.61s | −4.9% Llama 4 Scout is 4.9% 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 (Medium): 84.3% less intelligence, 58.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 4.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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 (Medium)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-medium/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-1-terra-medium/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill