Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Gemini 4 Argon vs Llama 4 Behemoth

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

由 GetInfoUs 研究团队审核最后审核日期:October 2026编辑政策
分享
Related topics (4)
GoogleMetaflagshipopen-source

Compare Gemini 4 Argon by Google against Llama 4 Behemoth by Meta across real-world coding, reasoning, token economics, and latency.

模型直接对比 (VS)

切换并对比任意模型

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

Live comparison: no in-depth editorial review has been published for this pair yet.

Popular Matchups:
Google

Gemini 4 Argon

深度推理模型

Google 推出的 Gemini 4 Argon 人工智能模型,具备 1M 上下文窗口,输入价格为 $2/百万 Token,输出价格为 $10/百万 Token,专为高质量生产环境、推理与自动化工作流打造。

Intelligence Index97 / 100
Input Token:

$2.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$10.00 / 1M

Context Window:

1M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

81.9%

Meta

Llama 4 Behemoth

开源权重模型

Meta 推出的 Llama 4 Behemoth 人工智能模型,具备 10M 上下文窗口,输入价格为 $0/百万 Token,输出价格为 $0/百万 Token,专为高质量生产环境、推理与自动化工作流打造。

Intelligence Index93 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

10M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

75%

核心差异一览

  • Llama 4 Behemoth is 1.0x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Llama 4 Behemoth has a larger context window (10M vs 1M tokens).
  • Gemini 4 Argon is faster at 115 tok/s vs 45 tok/s.
  • Gemini 4 Argon leads on SWE-bench coding (81.9% vs 75.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureGemini 4 ArgonLlama 4 Behemoth
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
9793
Provider
GoogleMeta
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$2.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$10.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$1.47 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text10M tokens~15,000 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
1000K64K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
115 tok/s45 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
81.9%75%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
81.5%82%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.10 / 1M$0.00 / 1M

各项指标谁更胜一筹?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Gemini 4 Argon
+6.9% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Llama 4 Behemoth
1.0x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Gemini 4 Argon
+156% faster generation
Context
Llama 4 Behemoth
10M tokens window

权威基准测试得分对比

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

Gemini 4 ArgonLlama 4 Behemoth
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

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

81.9%vs75%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

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

81.5%vs82%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

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

90.8%vs88.5%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

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

1525ptsvs1490pts
Humanity's Last Exam (Frontier Expert Knowledge)

Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.

18.9%vsN/A
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

57.4%vsN/A
SciCode (Scientific Computing)

Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.

56.4%vsN/A
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

80.5%vsN/A
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

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

94.8%vsN/A
Long-Context Reasoning

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

96.4%vs95%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

115 tok/s vs45 tok/s

延迟与响应速度

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
Gemini 4 Argon0.85s
Llama 4 Behemoth1.20s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Gemini 4 Argon5.20s
Llama 4 Behemoth12.31s

实时 Token 成本模拟器

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)
Gemini 4 Argon Monthly API Bill
$12.15 / month
$2/1M in · $10/1M out
Llama 4 Behemoth Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Llama 4 Behemoth saves approximately $12.15 / month (100%) under this workload.1.0x Savings

Gemini 4 Argon · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 由 Google 研发的高精度 Pathways Multimodal Sparse Mixture-of-Experts 架构,支持 1M 上下文窗口
  • 极具竞争力的 API 定价(输入 $2/1M,输出 $10/1M),支持高速推理与工具调用
  • 在代码生成、逻辑推理与多语言处理基准测试中表现出色
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 超长上下文请求需要规划 Token 成本与并发配额
  • 针对特定垂直领域任务建议结合系统提示词与检索增强(RAG)以获得最佳效果

Llama 4 Behemoth · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 由 Meta 研发的高精度 Colossal sparse MoE architecture (288B active / 2T total, 16-of-2 MoE) 架构,支持 10M 上下文窗口
  • 极具竞争力的 API 定价(输入 $0/1M,输出 $0/1M),支持高速推理与工具调用
  • 在代码生成、逻辑推理与多语言处理基准测试中表现出色
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 超长上下文请求需要规划 Token 成本与并发配额
  • 针对特定垂直领域任务建议结合系统提示词与检索增强(RAG)以获得最佳效果

Token Use & Task Economics

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

MetricGemini 4 ArgonLlama 4 Behemoth
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$2.45$0.00
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
75K35K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
36K15K

技术规格参数

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureGemini 4 ArgonLlama 4 Behemoth
Official API Model ID (SDK)models/gemini-4-argonmeta-llama/Llama-4-Behemoth
API ProtocolGoogle Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDKOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2026-092026-05
Knowledge CutoffJune 2026February 2026
ArchitecturePathways Multimodal Sparse Mixture-of-ExpertsColossal sparse MoE architecture (288B active / 2T total, 16-of-2 MoE)
ParametersConfidential2T total / 288B active (16-of-2 MoE)
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPMUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokensFree across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLImplicit + Explicit Context Caching at $0.1/1M with configurable TTLAutomatic 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 & SandboxBuilt-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportVertex AI Supervised Adapter Tuning & Context DistillationFull 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) · Audio (~25–32 tokens/sec) · Video (~258–300 tokens/sec)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMCloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 1240 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 4300 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationGoogle DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework VerifiedOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, vision, audio, videotext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

Gemini 4 Argon vs Llama 4 Behemoth: 常见问题解答 (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Gemini 4 Argon or Llama 4 Behemoth?

Gemini 4 Argon is more intelligent. It scores 97 compared with 93 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Gemini 4 Argon is faster, generating 115 tokens per second compared with 45 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Llama 4 Behemoth is cheaper at $0.00 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $1.47 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Gemini 4 Argon 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 1M tokens.

综合结论

Choose Gemini 4 Argon for 企业级 ai 自动化、代码研发、智能体(agent)工作流以及 google 生态深度集成, or choose Llama 4 Behemoth for 企业级 ai 自动化、代码研发、智能体(agent)工作流以及 meta 生态深度集成.

常见问题 (FAQ)

Which is cheaper: Gemini 4 Argon or Llama 4 Behemoth?+

Gemini 4 Argon costs $2/1M input and $10/1M output tokens, while Llama 4 Behemoth costs $0/1M input and $0/1M output tokens.

Which model has a larger context window: Gemini 4 Argon or Llama 4 Behemoth?+

Gemini 4 Argon supports 1M tokens whereas Llama 4 Behemoth supports 10M tokens.

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.

数据来源: Google & Meta Official Documentation