Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Llama 4 Behemoth vs Llama 5

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Verificato dal team di ricerca di GetInfoUsUltima verifica: October 2026Politica editoriale
Condividi
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Llama 4 Behemoth vs Llama 5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Llama 4 Behemoth di Meta e Llama 5 di Meta sono due modelli di IA di riferimento. Llama 4 Behemoth offre una finestra di contesto di 10M token a $0.00/$0.00 per milione di token, mentre Llama 5 mette a disposizione 5M token di contesto a $0.00/$0.00 per milione di token. Di seguito analizziamo benchmark, latenza e costi.

Confronto Diretto (VS)

Cambia e Confronta Qualsiasi Modello

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Meta

Llama 4 Behemoth

Modello Base a Pesi Aperti

Llama 4 Behemoth di Meta è un modello di IA progettato per il self-hosting su infrastruttura privata, il fine-tuning e la piena sovranità dei dati, con finestra di contesto da 10M, velocità di 45 token/s, indice di intelligenza di 93/100 e

Intelligence Index93 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

10M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

75%

Meta

Llama 5

Modello Base a Pesi Aperti

Llama 5 di Meta è un modello di IA progettato per il self-hosting su infrastruttura privata, il fine-tuning e la piena sovranità dei dati, con finestra di contesto da 5M, velocità di 65 token/s, indice di intelligenza di 94/100 e tariffa di

Intelligence Index94 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

5M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

74%

Differenze Chiave a Colpo d’Occhio

  • Both models cost the same under this workload — choose on capability, not price.
  • Llama 4 Behemoth has a larger context window (10M vs 5M tokens).
  • Llama 5 is faster at 65 tok/s vs 45 tok/s.
  • Llama 4 Behemoth leads on SWE-bench coding (75.0% vs 74.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureLlama 4 BehemothLlama 5
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
9394
Provider
MetaMeta
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
10M tokens~15,000 A4 pages of text5M tokens~7,500 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
64K128K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
45 tok/s65 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
75%74%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
82%84%

Chi vince in ogni categoria?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Llama 4 Behemoth
+1.0% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Tied
Identical monthly runtime cost
Speed
Llama 5
+44% faster generation
Context
Llama 4 Behemoth
10M tokens window

Punteggi Benchmark Verificati

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Llama 4 BehemothLlama 5
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

75%vs74%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

82%vs84%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

88.5%vs87%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1490ptsvs1485pts
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

N/Avs68%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

N/Avs88%
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

95%vsN/A
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

45 tok/s vs65 tok/s

Latenza e Tempo di Risposta

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Llama 4 Behemoth1.20s
Llama 50.85s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Llama 4 Behemoth12.31s
Llama 58.54s

Simulatore Interattivo dei Costi Token

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Llama 4 Behemoth Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Llama 5 Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
These models cost the same under this workload — no savings either way.Break-even

Llama 4 Behemoth · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Finestra di contesto da 10M con capacità massima di output fino a 64K token (SWE-bench Verified 75% · GPQA Diamond 82%)
  • Throughput elevato di 45 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 1200 ms
  • Pesi aperti (2T total / 288B (16-of-2 MoE)) pronti per il self-hosting locale o su cloud privato tramite vLLM, SGLang o Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Richiede server GPU dedicati con sufficiente memoria VRAM per l’esecuzione locale a piena precisione
  • Nelle dimostrazioni scientifiche più estreme, i modelli di ragionamento pesante dedicati offrono maggiore profondità

Llama 5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Finestra di contesto da 5M con capacità massima di output fino a 128K token (SWE-bench Verified 74% · GPQA Diamond 84%)
  • Throughput elevato di 65 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 850 ms
  • Pesi aperti (600B+ total (~40-80B )) pronti per il self-hosting locale o su cloud privato tramite vLLM, SGLang o Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Richiede server GPU dedicati con sufficiente memoria VRAM per l’esecuzione locale a piena precisione
  • Nelle dimostrazioni scientifiche più estreme, i modelli di ragionamento pesante dedicati offrono maggiore profondità

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricLlama 4 BehemothLlama 5
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.00$0.00
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
35K40K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
15K20K

Specifiche Tecniche

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureLlama 4 BehemothLlama 5
Official API Model ID (SDK)meta-llama/Llama-4-Behemothmeta-llama/Llama-5
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2026-052026-04
Knowledge CutoffFebruary 2026January 2026
ArchitectureColossal sparse MoE architecture (288B active / 2T total, 16-of-2 MoE)Mixture-of-Experts with recursive self-improvement (~600B total, 40-80B active)
Parameters2T total / 288B active (16-of-2 MoE)600B+ total (~40-80B active)
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)
Computer Use / GUI AgentSupported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox toolsSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) · Audio (~25–32 tokens/sec) · Video (~258–300 tokens/sec)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 1240 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 4300 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 372 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 1290 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision, video, audio
Output Modalitiestexttext

Llama 4 Behemoth vs Llama 5: Risposte Rapide (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Llama 4 Behemoth or Llama 5?

Llama 5 is more intelligent. It scores 94 compared with 93 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Llama 5 is faster, generating 65 tokens per second compared with 45 tokens per second.

Which model has lower latency?

Llama 5 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.85s compared with 1.20s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Llama 4 Behemoth has a larger context window, supporting 10M tokens compared with 5M tokens.

Verdetto

Sia Llama 4 Behemoth (Ideale per il self-hosting su infrastruttura privata, il fine-tuning e la piena sovranità dei dati, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) sia Llama 5 (Ideale per il self-hosting su infrastruttura privata, il fine-tuning e la piena sovranità dei dati, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) eccellono in produzione: Llama 5 guida nei benchmark di ragionamento e programmazione, Llama 5 garantisce una generazione più rapida e Llama 4 Behemoth offre il miglior rapporto qualità-prezzo per carichi API elevati.

Domande Frequenti (FAQ)

Quale modello è migliore per coding e ragionamento, Llama 4 Behemoth o Llama 5?+

Nell’indice di intelligenza composito e nei benchmark di programmazione prevale Llama 5. Consulta i punteggi SWE-bench e GPQA qui sopra per tutti i dettagli.

Qual è la differenza di prezzo API tra Llama 4 Behemoth e Llama 5?+

Llama 4 Behemoth costa $0.00 / $0.00 per milione di token di input/output, mentre Llama 5 costa $0.00 / $0.00. Nel costo combinato, Llama 4 Behemoth risulta più economico.

Quale modello ha la finestra di contesto più ampia e la velocità maggiore?+

Llama 4 Behemoth supporta 10M token di contesto contro 5M token di Llama 5, mentre Llama 5 offre una velocità di generazione superiore.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

Fonti ufficiali: Documentazione API ufficiale di Meta e Meta, schede di sistema e benchmark indipendenti (2026).