Meta (Llama) (16 models) vs Microsoft (2 models) — compared across composite scores, pricing, capabilities, and context windows.
| Meta (Llama) | Score | vs | Microsoft | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Llama 4 Maverick | 74 | Phi 4 | 46 | |
| Llama 4 Scout | 72 | WizardLM-2 8x22B | 34 |
| Capability | Meta (Llama) | Microsoft | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
Vision | 4/16 | 0/2 | Meta (Llama) |
Reasoning | 0/16 | 0/2 | Tie |
Function Calling | 7/16 | 0/2 | Meta (Llama) |
JSON Mode | 9/16 | 1/2 | Meta (Llama) |
Web Search | 0/16 | 0/2 | Tie |
Streaming | 16/16 | 2/2 | Meta (Llama) |
Image Output | 0/16 | 0/2 | Tie |
| Metric | Meta (Llama) | Microsoft |
|---|---|---|
| Cheapest Input (per 1M tokens) | $0.020 Llama 3 8B Instruct | $0.060 Phi 4 |
| Cheapest Output (per 1M tokens) | $0.040 | $0.140 |
| Most Expensive Input (per 1M tokens) | $4.00 Llama 3.1 405B (base) | $0.620 WizardLM-2 8x22B |
| Most Expensive Output (per 1M tokens) | $4.00 | $0.620 |
| Free Models | 2 | 0 |
| Max Context Window | 1.0M | 66K |
| Model | Score | Input $/M | Output $/M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Llama 4 Maverick | 74 | $0.150 | $0.600 |
| Llama 4 Scout | 72 | $0.080 | $0.300 |
| Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | 65 | $0.100 | $0.320 |
| Llama Guard 4 12B | 57 | $0.180 | $0.180 |
| Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct | 56 | $0.049 | $0.049 |
| Llama 3.1 70B Instruct | 55 | $0.400 | $0.400 |
| Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (free) | 54 | Free | Free |
| Llama 3.1 8B Instruct | 46 | $0.020 | $0.050 |
| Llama Guard 3 8B | 39 | $0.020 | $0.060 |
| Llama 3 70B Instruct | 38 | $0.510 | $0.740 |
| Llama 3.1 405B (base) | 38 | $4.00 | $4.00 |
| Llama 3 8B Instruct | 37 | $0.030 | $0.040 |
| Llama 3.2 3B Instruct | 35 | $0.051 | $0.340 |
| Llama 3.2 3B Instruct (free) | 34 | Free | Free |
| Llama 3.2 1B Instruct | 33 | $0.027 | $0.200 |
| Llama 3.1 405B Instruct | 31 | $4.00 | $4.00 |
| Model | Score | Input $/M | Output $/M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phi 4 | 46 | $0.060 | $0.140 |
| WizardLM-2 8x22B | 34 | $0.620 | $0.620 |
Compare any two AI providers side-by-side.
We compare providers across multiple dimensions: composite scores (combining capabilities, pricing, and performance), model count, pricing range, capability coverage (vision, reasoning, function calling, etc.), and context window sizes. All data is sourced from live API endpoints and updated hourly.
It depends on your use case. For cutting-edge reasoning, check which provider has the highest top-model score. For cost efficiency, compare pricing ranges and free model availability. For specific capabilities like vision or web search, check the capability comparison table above.
All comparison data refreshes hourly through our automated pipeline. Model scores, pricing, and capability data are pulled from provider APIs, ensuring you always see the most current information.