gpt-oss-120b (High) vs Llama 4 Scout

Which is better for the money: gpt-oss-120b (High) 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-oss-120b (High)Off the frontier

Intelligence: 11.60
Total cost: $123

MetaLlama 4 ScoutOff the frontier

Intelligence: 6.50
Total cost: $73.6

Verdict

Depends on your budget

gpt-oss-120b (High) scores 5.1 points higher (11.6 vs 6.5) but costs 1.7× as much to run the benchmark ($123 vs $73.6; both mid-range class). Pick gpt-oss-120b (High) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Llama 4 Scout.

Metric	gpt-oss-120b (High)	Llama 4 Scout	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	11.6	6.5	−44.0% Llama 4 Scout is 44.0% less intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$122.71	$73.56	−40.1% Llama 4 Scout is 40.1% cheaper
End-to-end time (lower is better)	11.29s	4.97s	−56.0% Llama 4 Scout is 56.0% faster
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)	$0.15 / $0.60	$0.18 / $0.66
Input modalities	Text	Text, Image

Llama 4 Scout vs gpt-oss-120b (High): 44.0% less intelligence, 40.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 56.0% faster end-to-end.

Open this matchup in the interactive picker gpt-oss-120b (High): what beats it Llama 4 Scout: what beats it

Today's Pareto frontier

Against the frontier

gpt-oss-120b (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.

gpt-oss-120b (High)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-oss-120b/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-oss-120b/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill