We Compare AI
🤖 AI Models

LLaMA 3.1 405B vs LLaMA 4 Scout — Which Is Better in 2026?

LLaMA 3.1 405B vs LLaMA 4 Scout: independent head-to-head scored on Performance, Value, Reliability, and Ease of Use. See scores, pros, cons, and our verdict.

Updated: 2026-04-13How we score →

Meta

LLaMA 3.1 405B

Best open-source LLM — free to run

Meta

LLaMA 4 Scout

Best open-source model with 10M token context

7.8

Overall Score

8.0

Overall Score

WINNER
8.5
Performance
8.8
9.5
Value
9.8
6.0
Reliability
6.0
5.0
Ease of Use
5.5

Our Verdict

LLaMA 4 Scout scores higher overall (8.0/10 vs 7.8/10), winning on Performance and Value. Best open-source model with 10M token context. Free to run, industry-leading context length.

Pricing — LLaMA 3.1 405B

Free (self-hosted) · Cloud inference from $0.003/1K tokens

Pricing — LLaMA 4 Scout

Free (open weights) · Cloud inference from major providers

LLaMA 3.1 405B

Pros

  • Fully open-source weights — self-host for free
  • No data sent to third parties
  • Competitive with GPT-4 class models

Cons

  • Requires GPU infrastructure to run
  • No official support or SLA
  • Harder to set up than hosted solutions

Best For

Privacy-first deployments, open-source enthusiasts, budget-conscious teams with infrastructure

LLaMA 4 Scout

Pros

  • 10M token context — industry-leading for open models
  • Free to self-host — no per-token costs
  • Strong multimodal capabilities

Cons

  • Requires GPU infrastructure to run locally
  • No official support or SLA
  • May lag frontier models on very complex tasks

Best For

Long document analysis, self-hosted AI, privacy-first applications

Choose LLaMA 3.1 405B if…

  • LLaMA 3.1 405B better fits your existing Meta ecosystem
  • Privacy-first deployments
  • Meta support, documentation, and community suit your team

Choose LLaMA 4 Scout if…

  • Performance is your top priority — LLaMA 4 Scout leads by 0.3 points
  • Long document analysis
  • You also value Value — LLaMA 4 Scout wins that dimension too

Frequently Asked Questions

Is LLaMA 3.1 405B better than LLaMA 4 Scout?

LLaMA 4 Scout scores 8.0/10 overall vs 7.8/10 for LLaMA 3.1 405B, with an edge on Performance and Value and Ease of Use. That said, "LLaMA 3.1 405B" may be the better pick if specific workflow fit is your priority. The right choice depends on your use case.

What is the pricing difference between LLaMA 3.1 405B and LLaMA 4 Scout?

LLaMA 3.1 405B: Free (self-hosted) · Cloud inference from $0.003/1K tokens. LLaMA 4 Scout: Free (open weights) · Cloud inference from major providers. Compare usage volumes and features needed to determine total cost of ownership for your team.

Which is better for long document analysis?

LLaMA 4 Scout is generally stronger here, scoring 8.0/10 overall. Best open-source model with 10M token context. Free to run, industry-leading context length. For more niche requirements like specific integrations, LLaMA 3.1 405B may be worth evaluating.

See all VS comparisons

4,000+ head-to-head comparisons across AI models, coding tools, image generators & more.

Browse all comparisons →