Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-5 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
- ✓Choose GPT-5 Nano if you need higher intelligence and faster responses for multimodal tasks.
- ✓Choose GPT-5 Nano if you need support for text, image, and file inputs together.
- ✓Choose GPT-5 Nano if you need efficient handling of large but not extreme contexts.
- ✓Choose GPT-5 Nano if you need a proprietary model from OpenAI with lightweight design.
Choose GPT-5 Nano if you need
- ✓Choose Llama 4 Scout if you need an extremely large 10M-token context window.
- ✓Choose Llama 4 Scout if you need the lowest price at $0.3 per 1M tokens.
- ✓Choose Llama 4 Scout if you need open-weight access and strong long-input reasoning.
- ✓Choose Llama 4 Scout if you need native text-and-image multimodal support at scale.
Verdict
GPT-5 Nano leads in intelligence (26.8 vs 13.5) and output speed (170.06 t/s vs 102.47 t/s) while adding file-input support, making it stronger for practical multimodal document work. Llama 4 Scout counters with a vastly larger context window (10M vs 400K tokens) and lower price ($0.3 vs $0.4 per 1M tokens) plus open-weight access. The choice hinges on whether users prioritize raw capability and speed or extreme context scale and cost.
Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-5 Nano: side by side
| Spec | Llama 4 Scout | GPT-5 Nano | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 13.5 | 26.8 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Output speed | 102 t/s | 170 t/s | GPT-5 Nano |
| Output price | $0.30/1M | $0.40/1M | Llama 4 Scout |
| Context | 10000K | 400K | Llama 4 Scout |
| Params | — | — | Tie |
| Type | Open-weight | Proprietary | Tie |
| Provider | Meta | OpenAI | Tie |
Detailed analysis
Intelligence
Winner: GPT-5 NanoGPT-5 Nano scores 26.8 on the intelligence index compared to Llama 4 Scout's 13.5. This gap indicates stronger overall capability for GPT-5 Nano despite both being multimodal. Llama 4 Scout still offers solid reasoning over long inputs but trails in measured intelligence.
Speed & Efficiency
Winner: GPT-5 NanoGPT-5 Nano delivers 170.06 tokens per second versus Llama 4 Scout's 102.47 t/s. Its lightweight design supports faster responses for extended document tasks. Llama 4 Scout may show latency on very long sequences despite its strengths.
Context Window
Winner: Llama 4 ScoutLlama 4 Scout provides a 10,000,000-token context compared to GPT-5 Nano's 400,000 tokens. This gives Llama 4 Scout a clear advantage for extremely long text and image sequences. GPT-5 Nano handles very large contexts efficiently but cannot match the maximum scale.
Pricing & Access
Winner: Llama 4 ScoutLlama 4 Scout costs $0.3 per 1M tokens versus GPT-5 Nano's $0.4, and it is open-weight from Meta. GPT-5 Nano remains proprietary from OpenAI. The price and licensing difference favors Llama 4 Scout for cost-sensitive or customizable deployments.
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 Nano
Pros
- +Handles very large contexts efficiently
- +Supports text, image, and file inputs
- +Lightweight design for faster responses
- +Practical for extended document tasks
Cons
- –Lower capability depth than full-scale models
- –May struggle with highly complex reasoning
- –Trade-off in advanced task performance
Summary: Llama 4 Scout vs GPT-5 Nano
Select GPT-5 Nano when intelligence, speed, and file-input support matter most. Choose Llama 4 Scout when maximum context length, lower cost, and open weights are priorities. Both models trade off depth and scale in different ways.
Frequently asked questions
GPT-5 Nano scores higher on intelligence and speed while supporting file inputs; Llama 4 Scout wins on context size and price.