GPT-5.4 nano vs Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct
GPT-5.4 nano comes out ahead, 68 to 62 on our weighted score, though Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct is 26% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
OpenAIGPT-5.4 nano
68/100- ECI145.8
- Price$0.20 / $1.25
- Context400K
MetaLlama 4 Scout 17B Instruct
62/100- ECI129.7
- Price$0.225 / $0.69
- Context10M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
GPT-5.4 nano is our pick
GPT-5.4 nano is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct (62). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct wins on price and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityGPT-5.4 nanoCapabilities Index (ECI): GPT-5.4 nano 145.8 · Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 129.7
- Lowest priceLlama 4 Scout 17B InstructLlama 4 Scout 17B Instruct $0.341 · GPT-5.4 nano $0.463 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextLlama 4 Scout 17B InstructLlama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 10,000,000 · GPT-5.4 nano 400,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGPT-5.4 nano: Text, Images · Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct: Text, Images
- Self-hostingLlama 4 Scout 17B InstructPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GPT-5.4 nano | Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 73 | 52 |
| Price | 25% | 66 | 72 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 70 | 50 |
| Context window | 10% | 44 | 100 |
| Overall | 100% | 68/100 | 62/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GPT-5.4 nanoOpenAI | Llama 4 Scout 17B InstructMeta |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.8 (best) | 129.7 |
| ECI rank | #75 of 148 (best) | #126 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 78.5% (best) | 51.8% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 44.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 87.8% (best) | 7.8% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 11.7% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.20 (best) | $0.225 |
| Output | $1.25 | $0.69 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.02 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.463 | $0.341 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official OpenAI API | Median of 4 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 400,000 tokens | 10,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens (best) | 16,384 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | gpt-5.4-nano | — |
| API providers | 26 (best) | 4 |
| Released | Mar 17, 2026 | Apr 5, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Aug 31, 2025 | Aug 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GPT-5.4 nano$4.50
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct$3.63
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-5.4 nano or Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct?
GPT-5.4 nano is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct (62). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct wins on price and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 nano or Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct is cheaper at $0.225 input / $0.69 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). GPT-5.4 nano costs $0.20 input / $1.25 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.341 per million tokens for Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct versus $0.463 for GPT-5.4 nano (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
GPT-5.4 nano scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GPT-5.4 nano 145.8 (#75 of 148) and Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 129.7 (#126 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (143.2–147.7 vs 124.8–131.4), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GPT-5.4 nano 78.5%, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 51.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GPT-5.4 nano 87.8%, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 7.8%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-5.4 nano and Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GPT-5.4 nano leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct has the largest context window at 10,000,000 tokens, against 400,000 for GPT-5.4 nano. Maximum output per response: GPT-5.4 nano up to 128,000, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct up to 16,384 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-5.4 nano accepts text and images; Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct accepts text and images. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-5.4 nano is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GPT-5.4 nano is the newest, released Mar 17, 2026. Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct came out Apr 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-5.4 nano Aug 31, 2025, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct Aug 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add MiniMax-M2.7Three-way comparison
- GPT-5.4 nano vs MiniMax-M2.7MiniMax · ECI 145.9
- GPT-5.4 nano vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 143.9
- GPT-5.4 nano vs DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek · ECI 146.3
- GPT-5.4 nano vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct vs Mistral Small 3.1 24BMistral AI · ECI 127.5
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct vs DeepSeek-V3DeepSeek · ECI 132.3
