Llama 4 Scout vs MiniMax M2-her
| Signal | Llama 4 Scout | Delta | MiniMax M2-her |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | +50 | |
Benchmarks | 59 | -7 | |
Pricing | 99 | +1 | |
Context window size | 97 | +21 | |
Recency | 32 | -53 | |
Output Capacity | 81 | +28 | |
| Overall Result | 4 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
60.2
current score
MiniMax M2-her
right now
62.3
current score
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
MiniMax M2-her
MiniMax
Llama 4 Scout saves you $42.50/month
That's $510.00/year compared to MiniMax M2-her at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | MiniMax M2-her | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 60 | 62 | MiniMax M2-her |
| Rank | #172 | #170 | MiniMax M2-her |
| Quality Rank | #172 | #170 | MiniMax M2-her |
| Adoption Rank | #172 | #170 | MiniMax M2-her |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1311K | 66K | Llama 4 Scout |
| Pricing | $0.18/$0.59/M | $0.30/$1.20/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 17 | Llama 4 Scout |
| Benchmarks | 59 | 66 | MiniMax M2-her |
| Pricing | 99 | 99 | Llama 4 Scout |
| Context window size | 97 | 76 | Llama 4 Scout |
| Recency | 32 | 85 | MiniMax M2-her |
| Output Capacity | 81 | 53 | Llama 4 Scout |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 60/100 (rank #172), placing it in the top 41% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 62/100 (rank #170), placing it in the top 42% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 2-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Choose Llama 4 Scout when you need:
- High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
- Processing long documents or large codebases (1311K token context)
- Multimodal workflows that require image understanding
- Agentic applications using tool/function calling
- Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Choose MiniMax M2-her when you need:
- Budget-friendly applications with moderate quality requirements
Llama 4 Scout offers 49% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $11.55/month with Llama 4 Scout vs $22.50/month with MiniMax M2-her - a $10.95 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Llama 4 Scout also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (1311K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.59/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (62/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Llama 4 Scout and MiniMax M2-her are extremely close in overall performance (only 2.0999999999999943 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
Llama 4 Scout
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Llama 4 Scout
49% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Llama 4 Scout
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Llama 4 Scout
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Llama 4 Scout
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Meta
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- Choose for Cost - 49% lower pricing; better value at scale
- Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
- Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
- Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
| Capability | Llama 4 Scout | MiniMax M2-her |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
MiniMax M2-her
MiniMax
Llama 4 Scout saves you $0.9480/month
That's 48% cheaper than MiniMax M2-her at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Llama 4 Scout | MiniMax M2-her |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1.3M | 66K |
| Max Output Tokens | 117,964 | 2,048 |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Created | Apr 5, 2025 | Jan 23, 2026 |