GPT-4o vs Claude 3.5 vs Gemini 2.0 vs Llama 4
Frontier LLM Comparison
Side-by-side comparison of the top 4 frontier language models — context length, reasoning, coding, multimodal, cost, and latency benchmarks.
GPT-4oClaude 3.5Gemini 2.0Llama 4
Full Specification Comparison
| Specification | GPT-4o | Claude 3.5 | Gemini 2.0 | Llama 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 128K tokens | 200K tokens | 2M tokens | 256K tokens |
| Multimodal | Text, Image, Audio | Text, Image | Text, Image, Audio, Video | Text, Image |
| Coding (SWE-bench) | 33.2% | 49.0% | 36.1% | 28.7% |
| MMLU Score | 88.7% | 88.3% | 90.0% | 84.5% |
| API Cost / 1M tokens | $2.50 / $10 | $3 / $15 | $1.25 / $5 | $0.50 / $2 |
| Open Weights | No | No | No | Yes |
| Speed (tokens/sec) | ~100 | ~80 | ~150 | ~120 |
Expert Verdict
Claude 3.5 leads in coding and reasoning; GPT-4o wins on multimodal and ecosystem; Gemini 2.0 excels at long-context; Llama 4 is the best open-weight option.
Subject Breakdown
GPT-4o
0 Category Wins
Claude 3.5
1 Category Wins
- ★ Coding (SWE-bench): 49.0%
Gemini 2.0
4 Category Wins
- ★ Context Window: 2M tokens
- ★ Multimodal: Text, Image, Audio, Video
- ★ MMLU Score: 90.0%
- ★ Speed (tokens/sec): ~150
Llama 4
2 Category Wins
- ★ API Cost / 1M tokens: $0.50 / $2
- ★ Open Weights: Yes