Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersThe learned values that shape how a model responds. B means billion and T means trillion. For mixture-of-experts models, the total count is larger than the number active for each token. Parameter count alone does not measure quality. | 400B | 397B |
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 1M | 1M |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins · base tier | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $0.40 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $1.60 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.1875DigitalOcean | $0.32Alibaba |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $0.6525DigitalOcean | $1.28Alibaba |
| $70.13DigitalOcean | $128Alibaba | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 29% | — |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | — | 77.7% |
LiveCodeBenchCompetitive coding — Coding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | — | 89.6% |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | — | 34.7% |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | — | 73.3% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | Qwen |
| Release date | Apr 5 2025 | Jun 1 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
LLaMA 4 MaverickvsClaude Haiku 5.5Qwen3.7-PlusvsClaude Haiku 5.5LLaMA 4 MaverickvsGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.7-PlusvsGPT-6.1 SolLLaMA 4 MaverickvsGemini 4 ArgonQwen3.7-PlusvsGemini 4 ArgonLLaMA 4 MaverickvsGrok 4.7Qwen3.7-PlusvsGrok 4.7LLaMA 4 MaverickvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Qwen3.7-PlusvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017LLaMA 4 MaverickvsMistral Large 4Qwen3.7-PlusvsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
LLaMA 4 Maverick and Qwen3.7-Plus don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only Qwen3.7-Plus has a verified first-party API price: $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for LLaMA 4 Maverick. LLaMA 4 Maverick shipped 422 days before Qwen3.7-Plus, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
LLaMA 4 Maverick has 400B parameters, while Qwen3.7-Plus has 397B. Context windows are 1M (LLaMA 4 Maverick) vs 1M (Qwen3.7-Plus). LLaMA 4 Maverick is open weight, while Qwen3.7-Plus is closed.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — LLaMA 4 Maverick and Qwen3.7-Plus don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.