ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GPT OSS 120B vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct

GPT OSS 120B comes out ahead, 61 to 58 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    OpenAI

    GPT OSS 120B

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    61/100
    • ECI140.0
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove GPT OSS 120B

  2. Meta

    Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct

    Released Apr 5, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI132.2
    • Price$0.321 / $0.91
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

GPT OSS 120B is our pick

GPT OSS 120B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct (58). It leads on capability and price. Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGPT OSS 120BCapabilities Index (ECI): GPT OSS 120B 140.0 · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 132.2
  • Lowest priceGPT OSS 120BGPT OSS 120B $0.263 · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct $0.468 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructLlama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 1,000,000 · GPT OSS 120B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructGPT OSS 120B: Text · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGPT OSS 120BLlama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6556
Price25%7766
Inputs & features15%4550
Context window10%2460
Overall100%61/10058/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

GPT OSS 120B vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationGPT OSS 120BOpenAILlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructMeta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)140.0 (best)132.2
ECI rank#99 of 148 (best)#122 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions75.8% (best)67.0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics88.9% (best)20.6%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.15 (best)$0.321
Output$0.60 (best)$0.91
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.263 (best)$0.468
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 36 providersMedian of 6 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model ID——
API providers39 (best)6
ReleasedAug 5, 2025Apr 5, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Aug 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • GPT OSS 120B$2.70
  • Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct$5.03
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GPT OSS 120B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct?

GPT OSS 120B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct (58). It leads on capability and price. Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GPT OSS 120B or Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct?

GPT OSS 120B is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (median across 36 API providers). Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct costs $0.321 input / $0.91 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.263 per million tokens for GPT OSS 120B versus $0.468 for Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct (1.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

GPT OSS 120B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GPT OSS 120B 140.0 (#99 of 148) and Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 132.2 (#122 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (135.3–142.3 vs 128.0–134.1), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GPT OSS 120B 75.8%, Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 67.0%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GPT OSS 120B 88.9%, Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 20.6%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT OSS 120B and Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GPT OSS 120B 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 Maverick 17B Instruct has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for GPT OSS 120B. Maximum output per response: GPT OSS 120B up to 32,768, Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GPT OSS 120B accepts text; Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct accepts text and images. Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

GPT OSS 120B is the newest, released Aug 5, 2025. Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct came out Apr 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Llama 4 Maverick 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons