Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-5.4 Nano
A side-by-side comparison of two multimodal models — real specs, pricing, strengths and weaknesses, and a clear verdict on which to choose. Kept current by our agents.
Quick verdict: which should you choose?
Choose Llama 4 Scout if you need
- ✓Extremely large 10M token context for long text and image sequences
- ✓Lowest price at $0.3 per 1M tokens
- ✓Open-weight model from Meta with strong reasoning over long inputs
- ✓Native multimodal support limited to text and images
Choose GPT-5.4 Nano if you need
- ✓Highest intelligence index at 38.2 for complex tasks
- ✓Fastest output speed at 147.78 tokens per second
- ✓Handles file, image, and text inputs with multimodal flexibility
- ✓Proprietary OpenAI model with 400k token context
Verdict
GPT-5.4 Nano leads in intelligence (38.2 vs 10) and output speed (147.78 t/s vs 112.66 t/s) while offering multimodal flexibility with file inputs. Llama 4 Scout dominates on context length (10M vs 400k tokens) and price ($0.3 vs $1.25 per 1M tokens) plus open-weight access. The choice hinges on whether extreme context and cost matter more than raw intelligence and speed.
Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-5.4 Nano: side by side
| Spec | Llama 4 Scout | GPT-5.4 Nano | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 10 | 38.2 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Output speed | 111 t/s | 151 t/s | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Output price | $0.30/1M | $1.25/1M | Llama 4 Scout |
| Context | 10000K | 400K | Llama 4 Scout |
| Params | — | — | Tie |
| Provider | Meta | OpenAI | Tie |
Detailed analysis
Intelligence
Winner: GPT-5.4 NanoGPT-5.4 Nano scores 38.2 on the intelligence index compared to Llama 4 Scout's 10. This gap suggests stronger performance on complex multimodal reasoning despite its Nano size.
Speed & Cost
Winner: GPT-5.4 NanoGPT-5.4 Nano is faster at 147.78 t/s versus 112.66 t/s, but Llama 4 Scout costs far less at $0.3 per 1M tokens versus $1.25. The speed advantage comes with a higher price tag.
Context Window
Winner: Llama 4 ScoutLlama 4 Scout provides a 10M token context window, vastly larger than GPT-5.4 Nano's 400k tokens. This enables superior handling of very long text and image sequences, though it may incur latency at maximum length.
Accessibility & Modalities
Winner: Llama 4 ScoutLlama 4 Scout is open-weight while GPT-5.4 Nano is proprietary. Both support text and images, but GPT-5.4 Nano additionally handles file inputs; neither supports audio or video.
Llama 4 Scout
Pros
- +Extremely large context window
- +Native multimodal input support
- +Strong reasoning over long inputs
Cons
- –High compute cost at maximum context
- –Limited to text and image modalities only
- –May exhibit latency on very long sequences
GPT-5.4 Nano
Pros
- +Very large 400k token context
- +Handles file, image, and text inputs
- +Multimodal flexibility
Cons
- –Nano size may limit depth on complex tasks
- –No audio or video modalities
Summary: Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-5.4 Nano
Select Llama 4 Scout when maximum context length, lowest cost, and open weights are priorities. Choose GPT-5.4 Nano when higher intelligence, faster generation, and file-handling flexibility matter most. The models trade off context and price against intelligence and speed.
Frequently asked questions
GPT-5.4 Nano scores higher on intelligence and speed while Llama 4 Scout wins on context size and price; neither is universally better.