GPT-6 Luna (Low) vs Llama 4 Scout
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Luna (Low) by OpenAI or Llama 4 Scout by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick GPT-6 Luna (Low)
Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-6 Luna (Low): 69.8% less intelligence, 592.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 20.2% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna (Low) | Llama 4 Scout | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 21.5 | 6.5 | −69.8% Llama 4 Scout is 69.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $10.63 | $73.56 | +592.0% Llama 4 Scout is 6.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 7.32s | 5.84s | −20.2% Llama 4 Scout is 20.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.18 / $0.66 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Luna (Low) 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 Luna (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-luna-low/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-luna-low/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill