Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct

At a Glance

Compare
Gemini 3.8 FlashGoogle DeepMind
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#8 of 4682.0 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 54.7–88.0UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#26 of 44$0.160 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#8 of 3860.4 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 46.7–63.4UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.75Google AI · Sep 2, 2026$0.10Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$3.75Google AI · Sep 2, 2026$0.30Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,049K10,000K
Model facts checkedSep 2, 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkGemini 3.8 FlashLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,494.67100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.8-flash-high; 95% CI [1486.13928353, 1503.20869643]; votes 5076; rank 61,279.2986% of row best · rating · llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct; 95% CI [1274.57681953, 1284.00026285]; votes 29740; rank 259
ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified77.82100% of row best · points · Gemini 3.8 Flash (high thinking) · 13,616 output tokens / case47.3261% of row best · points · Llama 4 Scout · 696 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above1 benchmark winNo overall winner0 benchmark winsNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldGemini 3.8 FlashLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindMeta
FamilyGemini 3Llama 4 Scout 17b 16e Instruct
ModelGemini 3.8 FlashLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct
VersionGemini 3.8 FlashLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-022025-04-05
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, Image, Video, Audio, DocumentText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,049K10,000K
Total parametersUnknown108.6B
Active parametersUnknown17B
LicenseUnknownother
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessGoogle AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, code_execution, computer_use, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, tools

Gemini 3.8 Flash Capabilities

chatcode executioncomputer usegenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-3.8-flash

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers4
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct FAQs

Is Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.8 Flash and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct?+

Gemini 3.8 Flash is $0.75 and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is $0.10 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is cheaper on this metric. Gemini 3.8 Flash is $3.75 and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is $0.30 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 3.8 Flash supports 1,049K and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct supports 10,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct be self-hosted?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemini 3.8 Flash is not marked open weight; Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is open weight.

Can Gemini 3.8 Flash and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct understand images?+

Gemini 3.8 Flash is documented with image input; Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 3.8 Flash is 66K and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is —.

Do Gemini 3.8 Flash and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct support reasoning and tool use?+

Gemini 3.8 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct: tool calling and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct?+

Gemini 3.8 Flash has 2 sourced provider routes; Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has 4, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E 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.

Send Feedback