Claude Opus 4.6 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct
Model Markets Rankings
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
| Ranking | Claude Opus 4.6 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v1.2 | #7 of 2276.2 score | UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #27 of 36$0.241 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 36-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.0 | #11 of 2252.1 score | UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort |
Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,497.70100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-6; 95% CI [1494.29292018, 1501.10380984]; votes 76032; rank 4 | 1,287.1386% of row best · rating · llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct; 95% CI [1282.87677682, 1291.39199009]; votes 39349; rank 243 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-08-27-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,311.43100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-6; 95% CI [1304.90444379, 1317.95290154]; votes 25210; rank 7 | 1,141.4787% of row best · rating · llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct; 95% CI [1132.42029588, 1150.51619722]; votes 6936; rank 102 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 2 benchmark winsOverall lead | 0 benchmark wins |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Opus 4.6 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Meta |
| Family | Claude 4 | Llama 4 Maverick 17b 128e Instruct |
| Model | Claude Opus 4.6 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
| Version | Claude Opus 4.6 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-02-05 | 2025-04-05 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-05-01 | 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, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, tools |
14 comparable fields · 9 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Claude Opus 4.6 Capabilities
Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct FAQs
Is Claude Opus 4.6 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 4.6 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 4.6 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Claude Opus 4.6 is $5.00 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.20 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.6 is $25.00 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.696 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Claude Opus 4.6 is 1,000K and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.6 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Claude Opus 4.6 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 4.6 is not marked open weight; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is open weight.
Can Claude Opus 4.6 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct understand images?+
Claude Opus 4.6 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 4.6 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 4.6 is 128K and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is —.
Do Claude Opus 4.6 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Opus 4.6: 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 4.6 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Claude Opus 4.6 has 1 sourced provider route; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct has 1, a tie.
Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.6 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.