Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | — | 397B |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | — | 1M |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $0.60 |
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. | — | $3.60 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.10DeepInfra | $0.065Alibaba |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $0.30DeepInfra | $0.13Darkbloom |
| Benchmarks | ||
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. | 20% | 78% |
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. | — | 76.4% |
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 69.3% |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 52.5% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | — | 69% |
Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | — | 28.7% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 88.4% |
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. | — | 62.2% |
CharXiv ReasoningChart reasoning — Can the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | — | 80.8% |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 79% |
MMMUMultimodal — Tests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | — | 85% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | Qwen |
| Release date | Apr 5 2025 | Feb 16 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
LLaMA 4 ScoutvsClaude Haiku 5.5Qwen3.5vsClaude Haiku 5.5LLaMA 4 ScoutvsGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.5vsGPT-6.1 SolLLaMA 4 ScoutvsGemini 4 ArgonQwen3.5vsGemini 4 ArgonLLaMA 4 ScoutvsGrok 4.7Qwen3.5vsGrok 4.7LLaMA 4 ScoutvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashQwen3.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashLLaMA 4 ScoutvsMistral Large 4Qwen3.5vsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.5 leads LLaMA 4 Scout on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (BullshitBench v2). Only Qwen3.5 has a verified first-party API price: $0.60 per million input tokens and $3.60 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for LLaMA 4 Scout. LLaMA 4 Scout shipped 317 days before Qwen3.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On BullshitBench v2, Qwen3.5 leads at 78% vs LLaMA 4 Scout at 20%.