Roboflow

Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 4 Scout

Compare Llama 4 Maverick and Llama 4 Scout side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.

Compare Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 4 Scout live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
MetaLlama 4 Maverick
Run to compare this model.
MetaLlama 4 Scout
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 4 Scout: Overview

Llama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick, introduced on April 5, 2025, is one of the first models in Meta’s Llama 4 family, designed as a natively multimodal model supporting text + image inputs with text outputs. It employs a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture with 128 experts, activating ~17B parameters per token out of a pool of ~400B total parameters. This design improves scalability, efficiency, and reasoning capacity. Maverick has a 1M-token context window, enabling it to handle large documents, extended conversations, and multimodal reasoning. Its knowledge cutoff is August 2024.

The model is released under the Llama 4 Community License and comes in both base and instruction-tuned (“Instruct”) versions. Maverick is widely deployed via Hugging Face, Google Vertex AI, Amazon Bedrock, and Oracle Cloud, making it one of the most accessible large open-weight models. However, it outputs text only (no image/audio generation) and, while input capacity is huge, output limits are typically much smaller. The MoE design also raises hardware demands, as maintaining 128 experts requires significant compute resources, and Meta’s license introduces restrictions around commercial-scale use.

Llama 4 Scout

Llama 4 Scout, released on April 5, 2025, is one of Meta AI’s first Llama 4 multimodal models, alongside Maverick. It accepts text + image inputs and produces text outputs, with a knowledge cutoff of August 2024. Scout is notable for its extremely large context window of 10 million tokens, making it well-suited for analyzing very long documents, extended conversations, or large codebases.

Architecturally, Scout uses a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) system with 16 experts, activating ~17B parameters per inference from a pool of ~109B total parameters, balancing capacity with efficiency. It officially supports 12 languages (including English, Arabic, French, Hindi, and Spanish), while offering multimodal reasoning for images (captioning, Q&A, recognition). Meta highlights that Scout can run on a single Nvidia H100 GPU, making it more accessible than larger-scale Llama 4 models. However, its output token limit is far smaller than its 10M input window, image input support is still constrained, and license restrictions apply for large-scale commercial deployments.

Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 4 Scout Comparison Table

PropertyLlama 4 MaverickLlama 4 Scout
OrganizationMetaMeta
Categoryopenopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateApr 2025Apr 2025
Context Window1.0M10.0M
Parameters400B109B
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.150$0.100
Output $/1M$0.600$0.300
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Object Detection
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
59.7%
67.16%
Avg Response Time2.30s43.93s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens2.4K
Median output tokens7
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0004
Defect Detection
66.7%(10/15)
73.3%(11/15)
Document Understanding
66.7%(6/9)
88.9%(8/9)
Object Counting
30%(3/10)
20%(2/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
71.4%(10/14)
Spatial Understanding
63.2%(12/19)
73.7%(14/19)
OCR
Overall Score
78.6%
70.74%
Avg Response Time0.87s0.74s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens472472
Median output tokens1012
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0001$0.0001
Focused Scene OCR
76.8%(76/99)
56.6%(56/99)
Handwritten Math
60%(6/10)
70%(7/10)
License Plate Recognition
93.3%(28/30)
93.3%(28/30)
Text Recognition
83.3%(25/30)
80%(24/30)
VQA & Extraction
75%(45/60)
78.3%(47/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology