ModelRefs / Llama 4 Scout vs InternVL2.5 78B
Llama 4 Scout vs InternVL2.5 78B
Llama 4 Scout vs InternVL2.5 78B: side-by-side benchmarks, pricing, context windows, coding ability and deployment. Pick the right model for your stack.
Overview
InternVL2.5 78B: InternVL2.5 78B is OpenGVLab's multimodal model in the ViT-MLP-LLM configuration, pairing the InternViT-6B-448px-V2.5 vision encoder with Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct as its language model for roughly 78 billion parameters in total. It keeps InternVL 2.0's architecture and advances instead through training and test-time strategy and a larger, filtered data mixture. The project is released under the MIT licence, while the Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct component it embeds carries the Qwen licence.
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: InternVL2.5 78B accepts up to 32,768 tokens, Llama 4 Scout up to 10,000,000. Confirm the limit for your specific deployment channel before relying on it.
InternVL2.5 78B vs Llama 4 Scout at a glance
| Attribute | InternVL2.5 78B | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenGVLab | Meta |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2025-04-01 |
| Context window | 32,768 tokens | 10,000,000 tokens |
| Input price | Free / self-hosted | $0.11/M tokens |
| Output price | Free / self-hosted | $0.34/M tokens |
| Licence | MIT | Llama-4-Community |
| Self-hostable | Yes, open weights | Yes, open weights |
| Modalities | text, vision | text, vision |
Benchmarks reported for both
| Benchmark | InternVL2.5 78B | Llama 4 Scout | Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU (accuracy) | 70.1 | 73.4 | 2024-12-06 / 2025-04-01 |
Each row compares the same benchmark, the same reported metric, and the same task set. Scores are as published by their cited sources on the dates shown. Different runs still use different harnesses and prompts, so treat these as directional evidence rather than a head-to-head result.
Where they differ most
- OCR: InternVL2.5 78B 62%, Llama 4 Scout 87%. Llama 4 Scout leads on this dimension.
- Multimodal: InternVL2.5 78B 62%, Llama 4 Scout 74%. Llama 4 Scout leads on this dimension.
- Cost Efficiency: InternVL2.5 78B 100%, Llama 4 Scout 94%. InternVL2.5 78B 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 InternVL2.5 78B.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Llama 4 Scout or InternVL2.5 78B?
Llama 4 Scout and InternVL2.5 78B target different workloads — see the benchmark and pricing tables for a side-by-side answer.
Is Llama 4 Scout cheaper than InternVL2.5 78B?
Compare $0.00011 vs $0.00000 on this page.