| Signal | Llama 4 Maverick | Delta | R1 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | +17 | |
Benchmarks | 70 | -3 | |
Pricing | 99 | +2 | |
Context window size | 96 | +19 | |
Recency | 66 | +14 | |
Output Capacity | 70 | +0 | |
| Overall Result | 5 wins | of 6 | 1 wins |
Score History
67.9
current score
R1
right now
73
current score
Meta
DeepSeek
Llama 4 Maverick saves you $150.00/month
That's $1800.00/year compared to R1 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Llama 4 Maverick | R1 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 68 | 73 | R1 |
| Rank | #89 | #58 | R1 |
| Quality Rank | #89 | #58 | R1 |
| Adoption Rank | #89 | #58 | R1 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1049K | 64K | Llama 4 Maverick |
| Pricing | $0.15/$0.60/M | $0.70/$2.50/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 50 | Llama 4 Maverick |
| Benchmarks | 70 | 73 | R1 |
| Pricing | 99 | 98 | Llama 4 Maverick |
| Context window size | 96 | 76 | Llama 4 Maverick |
| Recency | 66 | 53 | Llama 4 Maverick |
| Output Capacity | 70 | 70 | Llama 4 Maverick |
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 68/100 (rank #89), placing it in the top 70% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 73/100 (rank #58), placing it in the top 80% of all 290 models tracked.
R1 has a 5-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably better performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Llama 4 Maverick offers 77% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $11.25/month with Llama 4 Maverick vs $48.00/month with R1 - a $36.75 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
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Llama 4 Maverick also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.60/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (73/100) 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
R1 has a moderate advantage with a 5.099999999999994-point lead in composite score. It wins on more signal dimensions, but Llama 4 Maverick has specific strengths that could make it the better choice for certain workflows.
Best for Quality
Llama 4 Maverick
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Llama 4 Maverick
77% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Llama 4 Maverick
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Llama 4 Maverick
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Llama 4 Maverick
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Meta
| Capability | Llama 4 Maverick | R1 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoningdiffers | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Meta
DeepSeek
Llama 4 Maverick saves you $3.27/month
That's 77% cheaper than R1 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 Maverick | R1 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1.0M | 64K |
| Max Output Tokens | 16,384 | 16,000 |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Apr 5, 2025 | Jan 20, 2025 |
R1 scores 73/100 (rank #58) compared to Llama 4 Maverick's 68/100 (rank #89), giving it a 5-point advantage. R1 is the stronger overall choice, though Llama 4 Maverick may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Llama 4 Maverick is ranked #89 and R1 is ranked #58 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper at $0.60/M output tokens vs R1's $2.50/M output tokens - 4.2x more expensive. Input token pricing: Llama 4 Maverick at $0.15/M vs R1 at $0.70/M.
Llama 4 Maverick has a larger context window of 1,048,576 tokens compared to R1's 64,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.