Model comparison
Claude 3 Opus vs Llama 4 Scout
Claude 3 Opus is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.5 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3 Opus scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 4 Scout in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Claude 3 Opus leads 32.9 to 20.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 37.5% for Claude 3 Opus and 62.3% for Llama 4 Scout.
- Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 29.5 | 27.7 |
| Released | 2024-02-29 | 2025-04-05 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Results tracked | 46 | 43 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude 3 Opus leads
Claude 3 Opus: 32.9 (#267), Llama 4 Scout: 20.2 (#339)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1264 | 1286 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.4% | 43.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9.1% |
| SciCode | — | 17% |
| WeirdML | 19.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.5% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 38.6% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 77.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 73.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
Claude 3 Opus: 24.6 (#116), Llama 4 Scout: 24.6 (#119)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.1% |
| Cybench | 10% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 29.5% | — |
Reasoning Claude 3 Opus leads
Claude 3 Opus: 14.6 (#324), Llama 4 Scout: 9.1 (#345)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1245 | 1266 |
| DTBench | 61.6% | 57.9% |
| LMCA | 17% | 12% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 126.91 | 129.64 |
| ForecastBench | 58.4 | 57.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | 23.5% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 36.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 0.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 5% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 0.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 40.6% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 57.9% | — |
| LiveBench | 49.2% | — |
| WinoGrande | 88.5% | — |
Math Llama 4 Scout leads
Claude 3 Opus: 14.8 (#299), Llama 4 Scout: 19.6 (#286)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 4.7% | 7.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1273 | 1287 |
| MATH Level 5 | 37.5% | 62.3% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 37.3% |
| LiveBench Math | 43.6% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Llama 4 Scout leads
Claude 3 Opus: 24.5 (#267), Llama 4 Scout: 31.9 (#217)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.2% | 51.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | 1235 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 12.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 74.2% |
| Confabulations | 22.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 50.7% |
| MMLU | 84.6% | — |
Multimodal Llama 4 Scout leads
Claude 3 Opus: 27.1 (#116), Llama 4 Scout: 32.2 (#102)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1023 | 1118 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 34.2% |
Multilingual Too close to call
Claude 3 Opus: 41.4 (#207), Llama 4 Scout: 41.0 (#212)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1258 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1248 | 1255 |
| LMArena French | 1275 | 1282 |
| LMArena German | 1258 | 1272 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1204 | 1206 |
| LMArena Korean | 1187 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1280 | 1263 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1246 | 1278 |
Instruction Following Llama 4 Scout leads
Claude 3 Opus: 64.1 (#228), Llama 4 Scout: 65.8 (#217)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1248 | 1248 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 63.9% | — |
| IFEval | — | 81.8% |
Long Context Claude 3 Opus leads
Claude 3 Opus: 38.2 (#202), Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#294)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1259 | 1265 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 36% |
Writing & Preference Claude 3 Opus leads
Claude 3 Opus: 47.2 (#213), Llama 4 Scout: 37.0 (#261)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1262 | 1279 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1249 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1275 | 1280 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 783 |
| WildBench | — | 78% |
| LiveBench Language | 50.4% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3 Opus better than Llama 4 Scout?
Claude 3 Opus is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.5 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3 Opus or Llama 4 Scout better for coding?
Claude 3 Opus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.9 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3 Opus and Llama 4 Scout share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3 Opus has 46 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Scout has 43.