Which model is better: Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick is 93.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.20 vs. $3.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.60 vs. $15.00 for output tokens (15.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Llama 4 Maverick delivers lower response latency at 135ms TTFT (405ms faster than Claude 3.7 Sonnet) with 175 vs. 72 tok/s throughput. Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads coding evaluations at 70.3% SWE-bench Verified vs. 62.4% for Llama 4 Maverick and 78.5% vs. 73.8% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Llama 4 Maverick
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$3.00
$0.20
Llama 4 Maverick is 15.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$15.00
$0.60
Llama 4 Maverick (96.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.300
$0.050
Llama 4 Maverick is 6.0x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$3.75
$0.20
Llama 4 Maverick is 18.8x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (64k out)
1,049k (33k out)
Llama 4 Maverick (5.1x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
540ms
135ms
Llama 4 Maverick (405ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
72 tok/s
175 tok/s
Llama 4 Maverick (+103 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
70.3%
62.4%
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (+7.9% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
78.5%
73.8%
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (+4.7% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
88%
84.5%
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (+3.5% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
96.2%
91%
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (+5.2% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
54.3 / 100
77 / 100
Llama 4 Maverick (+22.7 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Which is cheaper: Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper at $0.20/1M input tokens ($0.60/1M output) compared to $3.00/1M input ($15.00/1M output) for Claude 3.7 Sonnet.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick delivers faster first-token latency at 135ms TTFT (175 tok/s throughput) compared to 540ms TTFT (72 tok/s) for Claude 3.7 Sonnet.
How do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Llama 4 Maverick compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores 70.3% versus 62.4% for Llama 4 Maverick. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores 78.5% versus 73.8% for Llama 4 Maverick (and 96.2% vs 91% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet?
Choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Anthropic) for full-stack repository development, complex code refactoring, and agentic tool use with predictable prompt cache economics — offering a 204k context window, 540ms TTFT, and $3.00/1M input pricing ($0.300/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Llama 4 Maverick?
Choose Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) for high-throughput open-weight multimodal assistants, enterprise RAG, and low-cost cloud inference on Groq and Cerebras — offering a 1,048k context window, 135ms TTFT, and $0.20/1M input pricing ($0.050/1M cached reads).
