Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E vs GPT-4.1 Nano

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.
FieldAt a Glance
Meta · activeLlama-4-Scout-17B-16EVerified Aug 28, 2026
OpenAI · activeGPT-4.1 NanoVerified Aug 29, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldLlama-4-Scout-17B-16EGPT-4.1 Nano
DeveloperMetaOpenAI
FamilyLlama 4 Scout 17b 16eGpt 4 1
ModelLlama-4-Scout-17B-16EGPT-4.1 Nano
VersionLlama-4-Scout-17B-16EGPT-4.1 Nano
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2025-04-05Unknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2024-06-01
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window10,000,0001,047,576
Total parameters108,641,793,536Unknown
Active parameters17,000,000,000Unknown
LicenseotherUnknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableUnknownYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessUnknownOpenAI (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolschat, generation, tools

11 comparable fields · 7 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Input price
Output price
Serving providers0
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E

GPT-4.1 Nano Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Input price$0.050
Output price$0.20
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-4.1-nano-2025-04-14

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All image comparisons →
APairBContext
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E vs GPT-4.1 Nano FAQs

Is Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E and GPT-4.1 Nano, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano?+

Only GPT-4.1 Nano has a directly sourced input price: $0.050 per million tokens. Only GPT-4.1 Nano has a directly sourced output price: $0.20 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano?+

Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E has the larger sourced context window. Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E supports 10,000,000 and GPT-4.1 Nano supports 1,047,576.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano?+

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

Can Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano be self-hosted?+

Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E is open weight; GPT-4.1 Nano is not marked open weight.

Can Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E and GPT-4.1 Nano understand images?+

Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E is documented with image input; GPT-4.1 Nano is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E is — and GPT-4.1 Nano is 32,768.

Do Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E and GPT-4.1 Nano support reasoning and tool use?+

Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E: tool calling and image input. GPT-4.1 Nano: tool calling and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano?+

Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E has 0 sourced provider routes; GPT-4.1 Nano has 2, so GPT-4.1 Nano has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E or GPT-4.1 Nano?+

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