OpenAI vs Meta (Llama)
OpenAI (97 models) vs Meta (Llama) (8 models) - compared across composite scores, pricing, capabilities, and context windows.
OpenAI
View all modelsMeta (Llama)
View all modelsHead-to-Head: OpenAI vs Meta (Llama) Model Matchups
Capability Comparison
| Capability | OpenAI | Meta (Llama) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
Vision | 78/97 | 3/8 | OpenAI |
Reasoning | 67/97 | 0/8 | OpenAI |
Function Calling | 89/97 | 5/8 | OpenAI |
JSON Mode | 95/97 | 7/8 | OpenAI |
Web Search | 76/97 | 0/8 | OpenAI |
Streaming | 95/97 | 8/8 | OpenAI |
Image Output | 4/97 | 0/8 | OpenAI |
Pricing Comparison
| Metric | OpenAI | Meta (Llama) |
|---|---|---|
| Cheapest Input (per 1M tokens) | $0.025 gpt-oss-20b | $0.027 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct |
| Cheapest Output (per 1M tokens) | $0.130 | $0.080 |
| Most Expensive Input (per 1M tokens) | $150.00 o1-pro | $0.400 Llama 4 Maverick |
| Most Expensive Output (per 1M tokens) | $600.00 | $0.800 |
| Free Models | 1 | 0 |
| Max Context Window | 1.1M | 1.3M |
All OpenAI Models (97)
| Model | Score | Input $/M | Output $/M |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.5 Pro | 93 | $30.00 | $180.00 |
| GPT-5.5 Pro (batch) | 93 | $15.00 | $90.00 |
| GPT-5.5 | 93 | $5.00 | $30.00 |
| GPT-5.5 (batch) | 93 | $2.50 | $15.00 |
| GPT-5.4 Pro | 92 | $30.00 | $180.00 |
| GPT-5.4 Pro (batch) | 92 | $15.00 | $90.00 |
| GPT-5.4 | 92 | $2.50 | $15.00 |
| GPT-5.4 (batch) | 92 | $1.25 | $7.50 |
| GPT-5.3 Chat | 91 | $1.75 | $14.00 |
| GPT-5.3-Codex | 91 | $1.75 | $14.00 |
| GPT-5.2-Codex | 91 | $1.75 | $14.00 |
| GPT-5.2 Chat | 91 | $1.75 | $14.00 |
| GPT-5.2 Pro | 91 | $21.00 | $168.00 |
| GPT-5.2 Pro (batch) | 91 | $10.50 | $84.00 |
| GPT-5.2 | 91 | $1.75 | $14.00 |
| GPT-5.2 (batch) | 91 | $0.875 | $7.00 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna Pro | 89 | $0.100 | $0.600 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna Pro (batch) | 89 | $0.100 | $0.600 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | 89 | $0.100 | $0.600 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna (batch) | 89 | $0.100 | $0.600 |
All Meta (Llama) Models (8)
| Model | Score | Input $/M | Output $/M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Llama 4 Maverick | 68 | $0.200 | $0.800 |
| Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | 67 | $0.100 | $0.320 |
| Llama 3.1 70B Instruct | 65 | $0.400 | $0.400 |
| Llama 4 Scout | 55 | $0.100 | $0.300 |
| Llama 3.1 8B Instruct | 45 | $0.050 | $0.080 |
| Llama Guard 4 12B | 40 | $0.180 | $0.180 |
| Llama 3.2 3B Instruct | 34 | $0.050 | $0.330 |
| Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | 18 | $0.027 | $0.201 |
More Provider Comparisons
Compare any two AI providers side-by-side.
OpenAI's portfolio strategy emphasizes specialized variants and legacy support, with 57 of 64 models supporting function calling versus Meta's 7 of 14. This breadth comes at a cost: OpenAI's average score of 49/100 barely exceeds Meta's 34/100 despite having 4.5x more models, suggesting diminishing returns from model proliferation.
OpenAI offers vision in 65.6% of its models compared to Meta's 28.6%, but Meta's Llama 4 Maverick (54/100) trails GPT-5.4 (67/100) by only 13 points without vision support. For pure text workloads, Meta's focused approach delivers 80% of OpenAI's performance at prices starting from $0.040/M tokens versus OpenAI's $0.110/M minimum.
OpenAI's $600/M ceiling reflects enterprise reasoning models with 34 of 64 models supporting reasoning capabilities, while Meta caps at $0.740/M with zero reasoning support across all 14 models. The sweet spot for cost-conscious deployments is Meta's $0.040/M tier, undercutting OpenAI's cheapest option by 63.6%.
OpenAI's value emerges in production scenarios requiring web search (31/64 models vs Meta's 0/14) or complex function calling where OpenAI's 89% model coverage dwarfs Meta's 50%. For self-hosted deployments or custom fine-tuning, Meta's complete open source portfolio and comparable 1.0M token context window make OpenAI's 5 open models irrelevant.
Both providers gate their best models behind paywalls: OpenAI's free tier likely excludes GPT-5.4 (67/100 score) while Meta's excludes Llama 4 Maverick (54/100 score). With Meta's entire lineup being open source, developers can self-host any model for free, making OpenAI's free tier useful primarily for testing their proprietary features like web search and advanced reasoning.