Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Llama 3.2 90B Vision vs Claude Opus 5.5

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)
MetaAnthropicflagshipflagship

Compare Llama 3.2 90B Vision by Meta against Claude Opus 5.5 by Anthropic 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:
Meta

Llama 3.2 90B Vision

开源权重模型

Meta 推出的 Llama 3.2 90B Vision 人工智能模型,具备 128K 上下文窗口,输入价格为 $0.0/百万 Token,输出价格为 $0.0/百万 Token,专为高质量生产环境、推理与自动化工作流打造。

Intelligence Index44 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

28.5%

Anthropic

Claude Opus 5.5

深度推理模型

Anthropic 推出的 Claude Opus 5.5 人工智能模型,具备 1M 上下文窗口,输入价格为 $4.0/百万 Token,输出价格为 $20.0/百万 Token,专为高质量生产环境、推理与自动化工作流打造。

Intelligence Index94 / 100
Input Token:

$4.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$20.00 / 1M

Context Window:

1M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

84.6%

核心差异一览

  • Llama 3.2 90B Vision is 1.0x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Claude Opus 5.5 has a larger context window (1M vs 128K tokens).
  • Claude Opus 5.5 is faster at 78 tok/s vs 75 tok/s.
  • Claude Opus 5.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (84.6% vs 28.5%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureLlama 3.2 90B VisionClaude Opus 5.5
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
4494
Provider
MetaAnthropic
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.00 / 1M$4.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.00 / 1M$20.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.00 / 1M$3.08 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
8K128K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
75 tok/s78 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
28.5%84.6%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
48.2%82.3%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.40 / 1M

各项指标谁更胜一筹?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Claude Opus 5.5
+56.1% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Llama 3.2 90B Vision
1.0x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Claude Opus 5.5
+4% faster generation
Context
Claude Opus 5.5
1M tokens window

权威基准测试得分对比

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

Llama 3.2 90B VisionClaude Opus 5.5
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

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

28.5%vs84.6%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

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

48.2%vs82.3%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

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

73.5%vs91.5%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

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

1260ptsvs1507pts
Humanity's Last Exam (Frontier Expert Knowledge)

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

N/Avs19.8%
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

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

N/Avs66.4%
SciCode (Scientific Computing)

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

N/Avs58.7%
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

N/Avs83.1%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

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

N/Avs95.4%
Long-Context Reasoning

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

N/Avs92.6%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

75 tok/s vs78 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
Llama 3.2 90B Vision0.58s
Claude Opus 5.51.40s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Llama 3.2 90B Vision7.25s
Claude Opus 5.57.81s

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)
Llama 3.2 90B Vision Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Claude Opus 5.5 Monthly API Bill
$24.60 / month
$4/1M in · $20/1M out
Llama 3.2 90B Vision saves approximately $24.60 / month (100%) under this workload.1.0x Savings

Llama 3.2 90B Vision · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 由 Meta 研发的高精度 Multimodal Adapter-Fused GQA Transformer 架构,支持 128K 上下文窗口
  • 极具竞争力的 API 定价(输入 $0.0/1M,输出 $0.0/1M),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

Claude Opus 5.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 由 Anthropic 研发的高精度 Extended Autonomous Hybrid Reasoning Transformer 架构,支持 1M 上下文窗口
  • 极具竞争力的 API 定价(输入 $4.0/1M,输出 $20.0/1M),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.

MetricLlama 3.2 90B VisionClaude Opus 5.5
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.20$3.85
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
24K68K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K42K

技术规格参数

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureLlama 3.2 90B VisionClaude Opus 5.5
Official API Model ID (SDK)meta-llama/Llama-3.2-90B-Visionclaude-opus-5-5-20260901
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIAnthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI
Release Date2024-092026-09
Knowledge CutoffDecember 2023June 2026
ArchitectureMultimodal Adapter-Fused GQA TransformerExtended Autonomous Hybrid Reasoning Transformer
Parameters90BConfidential
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)$0.4/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL
Computer Use / GUI AgentAPI / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)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 toolsNative Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation
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)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 56 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 194 GB VRAM (Native BF16)Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 ControlSOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

Llama 3.2 90B Vision vs Claude Opus 5.5: 常见问题解答 (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Llama 3.2 90B Vision or Claude Opus 5.5?

Claude Opus 5.5 is more intelligent. It scores 94 compared with 44 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Claude Opus 5.5 is faster, generating 78 tokens per second compared with 75 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Llama 3.2 90B Vision is cheaper at $0.00 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $3.08 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Llama 3.2 90B Vision has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.58s compared with 1.40s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 has a larger context window, supporting 1M tokens compared with 128K tokens.

综合结论

Choose Llama 3.2 90B Vision 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, or choose Claude Opus 5.5 for 企业级 ai 自动化、代码研发、智能体(agent)工作流以及 anthropic 生态深度集成.

常见问题 (FAQ)

Which is cheaper: Llama 3.2 90B Vision or Claude Opus 5.5?+

Llama 3.2 90B Vision costs $0/1M input and $0/1M output tokens, while Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/1M input and $20/1M output tokens.

Which model has a larger context window: Llama 3.2 90B Vision or Claude Opus 5.5?+

Llama 3.2 90B Vision supports 128K tokens whereas Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1M 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: Meta & Anthropic Official Documentation