Compare Meta: Llama 4 Scout (OpenRouter) and Anthropic: Claude Opus Latest (OpenRouter) by price, context, capabilities, and latency.
Cote a cote
Comparez le prix, le fournisseur, le contexte, les capacites, la latence et la base de source.
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Capabilities | Best for | Latency | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meta: Llama 4 Scoutmeta-llama/llama-4-scout | OpenRouter | $0.02 / 1M tokens | $0.058 / 1M tokens | 1.3M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Anthropic: Claude Opus Latest~anthropic/claude-opus-latest | OpenRouter | $0.94 / 1M tokens | $4.70 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
FAQ
Meta: Llama 4 Scout is cheaper ($0.02 / 1M tokens input / $0.058 / 1M tokens output) vs Anthropic: Claude Opus Latest ($0.94 / 1M tokens input / $4.70 / 1M tokens output). Actual cost depends on your input/output token mix — estimate it with the pricing calculator.
Meta: Llama 4 Scout is larger (1.3M tokens) vs 1M tokens.
Both target Vision. Pick Meta: Llama 4 Scout to optimize cost, or Meta: Llama 4 Scout for the longer context window. Test both on real prompts before committing production traffic.