ModelRefs / Llama 4 Scout vs Gemini 2.0 Flash
Llama 4 Scout vs Gemini 2.0 Flash
Llama 4 Scout vs Gemini 2.0 Flash: side-by-side benchmarks, pricing, context windows, coding ability and deployment. Pick the right model for your stack.
Overview
Gemini 2.0 Flash: Gemini 2.0 Flash is Google's multimodal workhorse, accepting text, image, audio and video input across a 1,048,576-token context window with an 8,192-token output limit and an August 2024 knowledge cutoff. Google's deprecations page gives it a shutdown date of 1 June 2026 and names gemini-3.6-flash as the replacement, and the Gemini API models page now lists it among previous models as shut down; it is retained here as a historical reference.
Llama 4 Scout: Llama 4 Scout is Meta's efficiency-focused open-weights model with an exceptionally large 10M-token context window and vision support. It is optimized for long-document retrieval and low-cost inference at scale.
Context window: Gemini 2.0 Flash accepts up to 1,000,000 tokens, Llama 4 Scout up to 10,000,000. Confirm the limit for your specific deployment channel before relying on it.
Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout at a glance
| Attribute | Gemini 2.0 Flash | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2025-04-01 |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 10,000,000 tokens |
| Input price | $0.1/M tokens | $0.11/M tokens |
| Output price | $0.4/M tokens | $0.34/M tokens |
| Licence | Proprietary | Llama-4-Community |
| Self-hostable | No, hosted only | Yes, open weights |
| Modalities | text, vision, audio | text, vision |
Reported on different variants
Both models are measured on these benchmarks, but not on the same variant of them, so the two numbers are not a like-for-like comparison. Each side is shown with the variant it was measured on.
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash | Llama 4 Scout | Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 77.6 (accuracy) | 74.3 (macro-average accuracy) | 2025-04-15 / 2025-04-01 |
A different task set or a different reported metric can move a score by more than the gap between two models. Use these as two separate findings, not as a ranking.
Where they differ most
- Reasoning: Gemini 2.0 Flash 75%, Llama 4 Scout 62%. Gemini 2.0 Flash leads on this dimension.
- Cost Efficiency: Gemini 2.0 Flash 93%, Llama 4 Scout 94%. Llama 4 Scout leads on this dimension.
Capability scores are ModelRefs' own derived signals, not vendor claims or benchmark results. Validate against your own workload before relying on them.
Continue your research
Use these connected ModelRefs sections to compare alternatives, inspect implementation paths, and review the evidence and governance boundaries relevant to Llama 4 Scout vs Gemini 2.0 Flash.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Llama 4 Scout or Gemini 2.0 Flash?
Llama 4 Scout and Gemini 2.0 Flash target different workloads — see the benchmark and pricing tables for a side-by-side answer.
Is Llama 4 Scout cheaper than Gemini 2.0 Flash?
Compare $0.00011 vs $0.00010 on this page.