GPT-6 Astra (Max) vs Llama 4 Scout

Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Astra (Max) by OpenAI or Llama 4 Scout by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.

Trade-off

OpenAIGPT-6 Astra (Max)Off the frontier

Intelligence: 52.70
Total cost: $5324

MetaLlama 4 ScoutOff the frontier

Intelligence: 6.50
Total cost: $73.6

Verdict

Depends on your budget

GPT-6 Astra (Max) scores 46.2 points higher (52.7 vs 6.5) but costs 72× as much to run the benchmark ($5324 vs $73.6; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-6 Astra (Max) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.

Metric	GPT-6 Astra (Max)	Llama 4 Scout	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	52.7	6.5	−87.7% Llama 4 Scout is 87.7% less intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$5,324.10	$73.56	−98.6% Llama 4 Scout is 98.6% cheaper
End-to-end time (lower is better)	280.51s	4.97s	−98.2% Llama 4 Scout is 98.2% faster
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)	$10.0 / $50.0	$0.18 / $0.66
Input modalities	Text, Image	Text, Image

Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-6 Astra (Max): 87.7% less intelligence, 98.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 98.2% faster end-to-end.

Open this matchup in the interactive picker GPT-6 Astra (Max): what beats it Llama 4 Scout: what beats it

Today's Pareto frontier

Against the frontier

GPT-6 Astra (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
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 Astra (Max)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-astra/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-astra/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill