Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs GPT-5.4 Mini

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort#38 of 4620.2 score · 3/3 sources · complete
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort#32 of 44$0.214 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort#38 of 3826.5 score · 3/3 sources · complete
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.10Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$0.75Openai · Sep 3, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.30Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$4.50Openai · Sep 3, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens10,000K400K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 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 →
BenchmarkLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructGPT-5.4 Mini
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,279.2991% of row best · rating · llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct; 95% CI [1274.57681953, 1284.00026285]; votes 29740; rank 2591,412.11100% of row best · rating · gpt-5.4-mini-high; 95% CI [1408.29499732, 1415.92580718]; votes 59387; rank 127
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,117.8090% of row best · rating · llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct; 95% CI [1108.35603674, 1127.24229078]; votes 6466; rank 1141,245.09100% of row best · rating · gpt-5.4-mini-high; 95% CI [1238.67164332, 1251.50821847]; votes 24041; rank 59
ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified47.3258% of row best · points · Llama 4 Scout · 696 output tokens / case82.16100% of row best · points · GPT-5.4 mini (high) · 9,924 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark winsNo overall winner2 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

FieldLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructGPT-5.4 Mini
DeveloperMetaOpenAI
FamilyLlama 4 Scout 17b 16e InstructGpt 5 4
ModelLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructGPT-5.4 Mini
VersionLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructGPT-5.4 Mini
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2025-04-052026-03-17
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2025-08-31
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window10,000K400K
Total parameters108.6BUnknown
Active parameters17BUnknown
LicenseotherUnknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Openai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct Capabilities

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

GPT-5.4 Mini Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-5.4-mini

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs GPT-5.4 Mini FAQs

Is Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and GPT-5.4 Mini, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is $0.10 and GPT-5.4 Mini is $0.75 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is cheaper on this metric. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is $0.30 and GPT-5.4 Mini is $4.50 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has the larger sourced context window. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct supports 10,000K and GPT-5.4 Mini supports 400K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini be self-hosted?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is open weight; GPT-5.4 Mini is not marked open weight.

Can Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and GPT-5.4 Mini understand images?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is documented with image input; GPT-5.4 Mini is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is — and GPT-5.4 Mini is 128K.

Do Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and GPT-5.4 Mini support reasoning and tool use?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct: tool calling and image input. GPT-5.4 Mini: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has 4 sourced provider routes; GPT-5.4 Mini has 2, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or GPT-5.4 Mini?+

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