💰 Unit Cost Winner Llama 4 Maverick $0.20/1M in · $0.60/1M out
⚡ Latency & Speed Winner Llama 4 Maverick 135ms TTFT · 175 tok/s
💻 Coding (SWE) Winner Claude 4 Opus 77.2% SWE-bench · 96.8% HumanEval
🧠 STEM Reasoning Winner Claude 4 Opus 87.1% GPQA · 98.1% MATH-500

Which model is better: Claude 4 Opus or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick is 98.7% cheaper for input tokens ($0.20 vs. $15.00 per 1M tokens) and $0.60 vs. $75.00 for output tokens (75.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Llama 4 Maverick delivers lower response latency at 135ms TTFT (785ms faster than Claude 4 Opus) with 175 vs. 46 tok/s throughput. Claude 4 Opus leads coding evaluations at 77.2% SWE-bench Verified vs. 62.4% for Llama 4 Maverick and 87.1% vs. 73.8% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.

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 4 Opus Llama 4 Maverick Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens $15.00 $0.20 Llama 4 Maverick is 75.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens $75.00 $0.60 Llama 4 Maverick (99.2% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M $1.500 $0.050 Llama 4 Maverick is 30.0x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M $18.75 $0.20 Llama 4 Maverick is 93.8x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output) 205k (64k out) 1,049k (33k out) Llama 4 Maverick (5.1x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency 920ms 135ms Llama 4 Maverick (785ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput) 46 tok/s 175 tok/s Llama 4 Maverick (+129 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding) 77.2% 62.4% Claude 4 Opus (+14.8% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM) 87.1% 73.8% Claude 4 Opus (+13.3% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline) 91.8% 84.5% Claude 4 Opus (+7.3% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic) 98.1% 91% Claude 4 Opus (+7.1% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR) 43.6 / 100 77 / 100 Llama 4 Maverick (+33.4 pts)

Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster

Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.

25.0M Tokens
500K 50M 250M 500M+
5.0M Tokens
100K 25M 75M 150M+
50% Cached
0% (Uncached) 25% 50% (Typical Agent) 95% Max

Estimated Monthly Spend

Claude 4 Opus $581.25

$15.00/1M in · $75.00/1M out

Prompt Cache: $1.500/1M read · $18.75/1M write

Llama 4 Maverick $6.13

$0.20/1M in · $0.60/1M out

Prompt Cache: $0.050/1M read · $0.20/1M write

Projected Monthly Cost Reduction
$575.13 / mo
(98.9% lower cost with Llama 4 Maverick)
Open Full Matchup Analysis →
A

When to Choose Claude 4 Opus

Choose Claude 4 Opus (Anthropic) for mission-critical R&D, long-horizon autonomous coding tasks, complex theorem proving, and executive strategic synthesis — offering a 204k context window, 920ms TTFT, and $15.00/1M input pricing ($1.500/1M cached reads).

B

When to 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).

Related Questions & Decision Factors

Which is cheaper: Claude 4 Opus or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper at $0.20/1M input tokens ($0.60/1M output) compared to $15.00/1M input ($75.00/1M output) for Claude 4 Opus.

Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 4 Opus or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick delivers faster first-token latency at 135ms TTFT (175 tok/s throughput) compared to 920ms TTFT (46 tok/s) for Claude 4 Opus.

How do Claude 4 Opus and Llama 4 Maverick compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?

On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 4 Opus scores 77.2% versus 62.4% for Llama 4 Maverick. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 4 Opus scores 87.1% versus 73.8% for Llama 4 Maverick (and 98.1% vs 91% on MATH-500).

When should you choose Claude 4 Opus?

Choose Claude 4 Opus (Anthropic) for mission-critical R&D, long-horizon autonomous coding tasks, complex theorem proving, and executive strategic synthesis — offering a 204k context window, 920ms TTFT, and $15.00/1M input pricing ($1.500/1M 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).

Explore High-Priority Related Model Matchups