Claude Opus 5.5 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $4.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $0.1875Openrouter ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $20.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $0.6525Openrouter ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 1,000K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 22, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Opus 5.5 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Meta |
| Family | Claude 5 5 | Llama 4 Maverick 17b 128e Instruct |
| Model | Claude Opus 5.5 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
| Version | Claude Opus 5.5 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2025-04-05 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-06-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 401.6B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 17B |
| License | Unknown | other |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard) | Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, tools |
| Message Batches max output (beta) | 300000 tokens | Unknown |
| Default effort | medium | Unknown |
| Retirement commitment | Not sooner than September 22, 2027 | Unknown |
| Thinking | Adaptive (always on) | Unknown |
Claude Opus 5.5 Capabilities
Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct FAQs
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 5.5 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Claude Opus 5.5 is $4.00 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.1875 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 5.5 is $20.00 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.6525 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Claude Opus 5.5 is 1,000K and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct be self-hosted?+
Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 5.5 is not marked open weight; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is open weight.
Can Claude Opus 5.5 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct understand images?+
Claude Opus 5.5 is documented with image input; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 5.5 is 128K and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is —.
Do Claude Opus 5.5 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Opus 5.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct: tool calling and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Claude Opus 5.5 has 1 sourced provider route; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct has 1, a tie.
Which offers better value, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.