GPT-6 Sol (Non-reasoning) vs Llama 4 Scout
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Sol (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI or Llama 4 Scout by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-6 Sol (Non-reasoning) scores 22.0 points higher (28.5 vs 6.5) but costs 6.1× as much to run the benchmark ($449 vs $73.6; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-6 Sol (Non-reasoning) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6 Sol (Non-reasoning) | Llama 4 Scout | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 28.5 | 6.5 | −77.2% Llama 4 Scout is 77.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $449.37 | $73.56 | −83.6% Llama 4 Scout is 83.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 5.75s | 4.99s | −13.2% Llama 4 Scout is 13.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $0.18 / $0.66 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-6 Sol (Non-reasoning): 77.2% less intelligence, 83.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 13.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Sol (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- 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 Sol (Non-reasoning)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-sol-non-reasoning/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-sol-non-reasoning/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill